利益相关者对管理式医疗计划质量的看法。

Managed care quarterly Pub Date : 2003-01-01
Jon M Thompson
{"title":"利益相关者对管理式医疗计划质量的看法。","authors":"Jon M Thompson","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Quality within managed care plans continues to be a contentious issue. This article reports on a case study undertaken to identify the importance of health plan quality attributes to three key stakeholder groups affiliated with a single plan: employers, physicians, and consumers. Findings from a representative survey of these three stakeholder groups indicate that they value different attributes, and suggest that plans must be responsive to these varying perceptions of quality.</p>","PeriodicalId":79681,"journal":{"name":"Managed care quarterly","volume":"11 2","pages":"12-21"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2003-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Stakeholder perceptions of quality in managed care plans.\",\"authors\":\"Jon M Thompson\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Quality within managed care plans continues to be a contentious issue. This article reports on a case study undertaken to identify the importance of health plan quality attributes to three key stakeholder groups affiliated with a single plan: employers, physicians, and consumers. Findings from a representative survey of these three stakeholder groups indicate that they value different attributes, and suggest that plans must be responsive to these varying perceptions of quality.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":79681,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Managed care quarterly\",\"volume\":\"11 2\",\"pages\":\"12-21\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2003-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Managed care quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Managed care quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

管理式医疗计划的质量仍然是一个有争议的问题。本文报告了一个案例研究,旨在确定健康计划质量属性对与单一计划相关的三个关键利益相关者群体的重要性:雇主、医生和消费者。来自这三个利益相关者群体的代表性调查的结果表明,他们重视不同的属性,并建议计划必须响应这些不同的质量观念。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Stakeholder perceptions of quality in managed care plans.

Quality within managed care plans continues to be a contentious issue. This article reports on a case study undertaken to identify the importance of health plan quality attributes to three key stakeholder groups affiliated with a single plan: employers, physicians, and consumers. Findings from a representative survey of these three stakeholder groups indicate that they value different attributes, and suggest that plans must be responsive to these varying perceptions of quality.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
State regulation of medical discount programs: a new frontier. A new "loyalty rewards" program in health care customer relationships. MCOs following innovative CMS remote monitoring initiative: self-testing service is designed to lower costs and improve outcomes for anticoagulation therapy. Oath-based behavior change in "out-of-control" type 2 diabetics? Ten-city disease management project intended to increase wellness efforts.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1