[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 54.163.159.27. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Views 34
Citations 0
Correction
September 2016

Text Missing From the Discussion Section

JAMA Intern Med. 2016;176(9):1412. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.4937

In the Original Investigation titled “Mortality for Publicly Reported Conditions and Overall Hospital Mortality Rates” published in the July 22, 2013, issue of JAMA Internal Medicine,1 a portion of the text in the Discussion section was missing from the online .pdf and print versions of the article. In the second paragraph of the Discussion section, the last sentence, which read, “This may explain the somewhat stronger effect of the publicly reported conditions on predicting specific factors likely still contribute to patient outcomes, the broader findings from our work support the notion that there may actually be ‘good’ and ‘bad’ hospitals and that performance on a manageable set of key indicators can help identify such institutions.” should be replaced with “This may explain the somewhat stronger effect of the publicly reported conditions on predicting medical performance vs surgical performance, particularly for high-comorbidity surgical patients, who likely need particularly specialized care. In addition, emerging data suggest that leadership plays a critical role in hospital quality, perhaps promoting a broad culture of excellence.12,13 While the fact that the ORs were only moderately strong suggests that clinician-specific factors likely still contribute to patient outcomes, the broader findings from our work support the notion that there may actually be ‘good’ and ‘bad’ hospitals and that performance on a manageable set of key indicators can help identify such institutions.” This article was corrected online.

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview
×