Talk:Health care ratings

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

United States: Government Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. Government (assessed as Low-importance).

Health and fitness Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Health and fitness, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of health and physical fitness related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Health and fitnessWikipedia:WikiProject Health and fitnessTemplate:WikiProject Health and fitnessHealth and fitness articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

Your introduction is well done, but I'm hoping you have text somewhere for all the topics that you outlined. BrickWallBartholomew (talk) 18:49, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comment. The text will start going up this weekend after I finish a paper. I had internet problems at home and got off schedule. Hope you will check back and make edits.AC19 (talk) 00:04, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Intro critique

I think the lead (introduction) needs to be spruced up to meet WP:LEDE standards. It is not at all clear from the get-go what, exactly, health quality report cards are. The lead should serve as more of a standalone article than a narrative like it is now.

The first bit and other parts you have there could maybe serve as a closing to your lead, or it could serve the article better as part of your "history" section. Your outline looks good. I would maybe change "possible benefits" to a section titled "Purpose" and "possible challenges" to a section called "Criticism" or something like that to better reflect Wikipedia's standard structuring. Boonefrog (talk) 19:28, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I will agree with Boonefrog. I think the topic sounds very interesting and I'm looking forward to understand more about Health Report Cards but it was hard to grasp what they are exactly in the introduction. Hope this process is going well for you. -Joe from classJjwiki14 (talk) 21:48, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tow things stand out when reading this entry (1) it is a very US-centric view and (2) it appears to focus on clinical quality with little to no mention of cost and experience (satisfaction) reporting. I would be happy to write a new intro that explains what report cards are, and to vet the article in general, but I am wary of perceived bias (I produce health report cards for many of the listed entities and others). I'll leave this note here and check in after a while, if no replies I will jump in to the article. Mynameismonkey (talk) 16:01, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Move to Health quality reporting

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was no consensus; new RM opened. --BDD (talk) 17:50, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Health quality report card → Health quality reporting – The article fails to define what a health quality report card actually is. Health quality reporting, on the other hand, is rather self-explanatory. Relisted Hot Stop talk-contribs 02:16, 4 November 2013 (UTC) Mikael Häggström (talk) 08:29, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

None of the above -- Good question, but wrong direction. This article needs to say Health CARE report card or 'healthcare provider ratings' or something to match that the article is about describing the provider. The phrase 'health report card' or 'health reporting' without 'care' would refer to health of a person (e.g. blood pressure and other individual measures,) rather than refer to care given by a facilty for it's patients. See also title guidances Markbassett (talk) 14:25, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that neither the current name nor my suggestion specifies whether it's about the provider or the recipient of health care. I think Health care provider ratings, as you suggested, is an even better alternative. Mikael Häggström (talk) 04:52, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Move to Health care provider ratings

It was proposed in this section that Health care ratings be renamed and moved to Health care provider ratings.

The discussion has been closed, and the result will be found in the closer's comment.

Links: current log • target log

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Mikael Häggström (talk) 17:12, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Health quality report card → Health care provider ratings – As stated above, the article doesn't describe the actual cards themselves. Also, "provider" clarified the fact that it's about the provider and not the recipient. Mikael Häggström (talk) 06:16, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mikael Häggström, this appears uncontroversial, but the move will require more than trivial changes to the lede. Are you willing to clean up after the move? --BDD (talk) 17:51, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I can do adapt the lede to the new article title. Mikael Häggström (talk) 21:41, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Sentence from lead

I moved the following sentence to here, because before reinsertion I think it needs to specify what are the "pitfalls" and "societal and economic forces". Currently it seems to me to be a collection of complex words that taken together still doesn't provide a clear meaning.

Health care report cards hold great promise to engage consumers and support patient centered care, yet the potential pitfalls cannot be ignored. Societal and economic forces that create barriers to care, health disparities and quality of care concerns will exert similar influence on the implementation and impact of health care report cards.^[1]

References

^ Casalino, Elster, Eisenberg, Lewis, Montgomery and Ramos (2007). "Will Pay-For-Performance And Quality Reporting Affect Health Care Disparities?". Web Exclusives. Health Affairs. pp. w405–w414. Retrieved March 8, 2011.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)

Mikael Häggström (talk) 17:28, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Health care ratings. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131202225644/http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Features/Insuring-Your-Health/andrews-column-on-physician-ratings.aspx to http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Features/Insuring-Your-Health/andrews-column-on-physician-ratings.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:03, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Globalise

Health care ratings are not a US-specific policy. In the UK, for example, we have the Care Quality Commission. I don't have enough time left in my lunch break to add anything but this comment and the tag. I will try and get back to this tonight. Little pob (talk) 12:29, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Little pob: Thanks for whatever you can do. As you can see, the information is low quality for the US and non-existent for elsewhere. Similar problems exist in related articles.

A hospital communications officer just asked about ratings at WP:HOSPITAL and actually lots of clinics ask. I think readers would like to see ratings on hospital articles if only the datasets were open and we could come to agreement about how to publish them. Thanks for whatever you can do. Thanks for editing wiki - if you stick around say hello at WP:MED. Blue Rasberry (talk) 14:56, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Bluerasberry: I often lurk at WP:MED. I very rarely chime in though, as the discussions are often very much outside of my realm of expertise. It was the discussion there that sent me here though. I'll take a look at the discussion over at WP:HOSPITAL. I'm not 100% sure how to approach this article yet. In a short time of searching, I've yet to find a world ranking of hospitals (there are a couple of "top 10" articles from this decade). Whilst I have come across Spanish National Research Council's Ranking Web of Hospitals,[1] it doesn't technically rank the hospitals themselves; but rather their webometrics. Little pob (talk) 16:52, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Ambassador Program course assignment

This article is the subject of an educational assignment at Winona State University supported by WikiProject United States Public Policy and the Wikipedia Ambassador Program during the 2011 Spring term. Further details are available on the course page.

The above message was substituted from {{WAP assignment}} by PrimeBOT (talk) on 16:36, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

[HA:_P4P_and_Reporting-1] Casalino, Elster, Eisenberg, Lewis, Montgomery and Ramos (2007). "Will Pay-For-Performance And Quality Reporting Affect Health Care Disparities?". Web Exclusives. Health Affairs. pp. w405–w414. Retrieved March 8, 2011.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)

[1]