{"title":"反对:目前的实验室基准测试方案还不够好。","authors":"Debbie Reynolds","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In an ideal world, benchmarking performance in the clinical laboratory would improve performance, quality, and overall patient satisfaction. However, there is a reason why laboratory managers continue to be on the lookout for the perfect benchmarking product--it doesn't exist. As a result, benchmarking performance in the laboratory is inherently flawed. Here is why.</p>","PeriodicalId":80950,"journal":{"name":"Clinical leadership & management review : the journal of CLMA","volume":"20 6","pages":"E3"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2006-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Con: current laboratory benchmarking options are not good enough.\",\"authors\":\"Debbie Reynolds\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>In an ideal world, benchmarking performance in the clinical laboratory would improve performance, quality, and overall patient satisfaction. However, there is a reason why laboratory managers continue to be on the lookout for the perfect benchmarking product--it doesn't exist. As a result, benchmarking performance in the laboratory is inherently flawed. Here is why.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":80950,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical leadership & management review : the journal of CLMA\",\"volume\":\"20 6\",\"pages\":\"E3\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2006-11-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical leadership & management review : the journal of CLMA\",\"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":"Clinical leadership & management review : the journal of CLMA","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Con: current laboratory benchmarking options are not good enough.
In an ideal world, benchmarking performance in the clinical laboratory would improve performance, quality, and overall patient satisfaction. However, there is a reason why laboratory managers continue to be on the lookout for the perfect benchmarking product--it doesn't exist. As a result, benchmarking performance in the laboratory is inherently flawed. Here is why.