Dataset Information

US News and World Report cancer hospital rankings: do they reflect measures of research productivity?

ABSTRACT: CONTEXT: Prior research has faulted the US News and World Report hospital specialty rankings for excessive reliance on reputation, a subjective measure of a hospital's performance. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether and to what extent reputation correlates with objective measures of research productivity among cancer hospitals. DESIGN: A retrospective observational study. SETTING: Automated search of NIH Reporter, BioEntrez, BioMedline and Clinicaltrials.gov databases. PARTICIPANTS: The 50 highest ranked cancer hospitals in 2013's US News and World Report Rankings. EXPOSURE: We ascertained the number of NCI funded grants, and the cumulative funds received by each cancer center. Additionally, we identified the number of phase I, phase II, and phase III studies published and indexed in MEDLINE, and registered at clinicaltrials.gov. All counts were over the preceding 5 years. For published articles, we summed the impact factor of the journals in which they appeared. Trials were attributed to centers on the basis of the affiliation of the lead author or study principal investigator. MAIN OUTCOME: Correlation coefficients from simple and multiple linear regressions for measures of research productivity and a center's reputation. RESULTS: All measures of research productivity demonstrated robust correlation with reputation (mean r-squared ?=?0.65, median r-squared?=?0.68, minimum r-squared?=?.41, maximum r-squared?=?0.80). A multivariable model showed that 93% of the variation in reputation is explained by objective measures. CONCLUSION: Contrary to prior criticism, the majority of reputation, used in US News and World Rankings, can be explained by objective measures of research productivity among cancer hospitals.

SUBMITTER: Prasad V

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4172593 | biostudies-other | 2014

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

US News and World Report cancer hospital rankings: do they reflect measures of research productivity?

Prasad Vinay V Goldstein Jeffrey A JA

PloS one 20140923 9

<h4>Context</h4>Prior research has faulted the US News and World Report hospital specialty rankings for excessive reliance on reputation, a subjective measure of a hospital's performance.<h4>Objective</h4>To determine whether and to what extent reputation correlates with objective measures of research productivity among cancer hospitals.<h4>Design</h4>A retrospective observational study.<h4>Setting</h4>Automated search of NIH Reporter, BioEntrez, BioMedline and Clinicaltrials.gov databases.<h4>P ...[more]

PMID: 25247921

Similar Datasets

Project description:Journalists' health and science reporting aid the public's direct access to research through the inclusion of hyperlinks leading to original studies in peer-reviewed journals. While this effort supports the US-government mandate that research be made widely available, little is known about what research journalists share with the public. This cross-sectional exploratory study characterises US-government-funded research on cancer that appeared most frequently in news coverage and how that coverage varied by cancer type, disease incidence and mortality rates. The subject of analysis was 11436 research articles (published in 2016) on cancer funded by the US government and 642 news stories mentioning at least one of these articles. Based on Altmetric data, researchers identified articles via PubMed and characterised each based on the news media attention received online. Only 1.88% (n = 213) of research articles mentioning US government-funded cancer research included at least one mention in an online news publication. This is in contrast to previous research that found 16.8% (n = 1925) of articles received mention by online mass media publications. Of the 13 most common cancers in the US, 12 were the subject of at least one news mention; only urinary and bladder cancer received no mention. Traditional news sources included significantly more mentions of research on common cancers than digital native news sources. However, a general discrepancy exists between cancers prominent in news sources and those with the highest mortality rate. For instance, lung cancer accounted for the most deaths annually, while melanoma led to 56% less annual deaths; however, journalists cited research regarding these cancers nearly equally. Additionally, breast cancer received the greatest coverage per estimated annual death, while pancreatic cancer received the least coverage per death. Findings demonstrated a continued misalignment between prevalent cancers and cancers mentioned in online news media. Additionally, cancer control and prevention received less coverage from journalists than other cancer continuum stages, highlighting a continued underrepresentation of prevention-focused research. Results revealed a need for further scholarship regarding the role of journalists in research dissemination.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Studying the determinants and the long-term consequences of fetal adipose accretion requires accurate assessment of neonatal body composition. In large epidemiological studies, in-depth body composition measurement methods are usually not feasible for cost and logistical reasons, and there is a need to identify anthropometric measures that adequately reflect neonatal adiposity. METHODS:In a multiethnic Asian mother-offspring cohort in Singapore, anthropometric measures (weight, length, abdominal circumference, skinfold thicknesses) were measured using standardized protocols in newborn infants, and anthropometric indices (weight/length, weight/length2 (body mass index, BMI), weight/length3 (ponderal index, PI)) derived. Neonatal total adiposity was measured using air displacement plethysmography (ADP) and abdominal adiposity using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Correlations of the anthropometric measures with ADP- and MRI-based adiposity were assessed using Pearson's correlation coefficients (rp), including in subsamples stratified by sex and ethnicity. RESULTS:Study neonates (n=251) had a mean (s.d.) age of 10.2 (2.5) days. Correlations between ADP-based fat mass (ADPFM) and anthropometric measures were moderate (rp range: 0.44-0.67), with the strongest being with weight/length, weight, BMI and sum of skinfolds (rp=0.67, 0.66, 0.62, 0.62, respectively, all P<0.01). All anthropometric measures except skinfold thicknesses correlated more strongly with ADP-based fat-free mass than ADPFM, indicating that skinfold measures may have more discriminative power in terms of neonatal total body adiposity. For MRI-based measures, weight and weight/length consistently showed strong positive correlations (rp?0.7) with abdominal adipose tissue compartments. These correlations were consistent in boys and girls, across different ethnic groups, and when conventional determinants of neonatal adiposity were adjusted for potential confounding. Abdominal circumference was not strongly associated with ADPFM or abdominal fat mass. CONCLUSIONS:Simple anthropometric measures (weight and weight/length) correlated strongly with neonatal adiposity, with some evidence for greater discriminative power for skinfold measures. These simple measures could be of value in large epidemiological studies.

Project description:ImportanceThe US News & World Report (USNWR) annual ranking of the best hospitals for gastroenterology and gastrointestinal operations provides guidance and referral of care for medical and surgical gastrointestinal conditions.ObjectiveTo investigate whether USNWR top-ranked hospitals for gastroenterology and gastrointestinal surgical procedures are associated with improvements in patient outcomes, compared with nonranked hospitals, in common advanced laparoscopic abdominal operations.Design, setting, and participantsThis study used the Vizient database, which contains administrative, clinical, and financial inpatient information of index hospitalizations for US academic centers and their affiliated hospitals that are members of Vizient. Data were obtained on advanced laparoscopic abdominal operations performed from January 1, 2017, through December 31, 2017, at USNWR top-ranked hospitals (n = 16 296 operations) and nonranked hospitals (n = 35 573 operations). Abdominal operations included bariatric, colorectal, and hiatal hernia procedures. Operations on patients younger than 18 years, emergent cases, conversion cases, and patients with extreme severity of illness were excluded.Main outcomes and measuresOutcome measures included in-hospital mortality, mortality index (observed to expected mortality ratio), serious morbidity, length of stay, and cost.ResultsA total of 51 869 advanced laparoscopic abdominal operations were performed at 351 academic health centers and their community affiliates. Of these procedures, 16 296 (31.4%) were performed at 41 top-ranked hospitals and 35 573 (68.6%) at 310 nonranked hospitals. The annual case volume at top-ranked hospitals was 397 compared with 114 at nonranked hospitals. Between top-ranked and nonranked hospitals, no significant differences were found in in-hospital mortality (0.04% vs 0.07%; P = .33) or serious morbidity (1.06% vs 1.02%; P = .75). Compared with nonranked hospitals, advanced laparoscopic abdominal operations performed at top-ranked hospitals had higher mean costs ($7128 [$4917] vs $7742 [$6787]; P < .01) and longer mean lengths of stay (2.38 [2.60] days vs 2.73 [3.31] days; P < .01).Conclusions and relevanceAlthough, among academic centers, the annual volume of advanced laparoscopic abdominal operations was 3-fold higher for USNWR top-ranked hospitals compared with nonranked hospitals, the volume did not appear to be associated with improved patient outcomes.

Dataset Information

US News and World Report cancer hospital rankings: do they reflect measures of research productivity?

Publications

US News and World Report cancer hospital rankings: do they reflect measures of research productivity?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets