國立虎尾科技大學 |

Associations With Gaps in Standardized Methods for Measuring Social Determinants of Health When Compared With State and County Level 2019, 2020, and 2023 Methods for Measuring Health Outcomes in Five Southeast States.

紀錄類型:	書目-語言資料,手稿 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Associations With Gaps in Standardized Methods for Measuring Social Determinants of Health When Compared With State and County Level 2019, 2020, and 2023 Methods for Measuring Health Outcomes in Five Southeast States./
作者:	Mullen, Barry Kenneth.
面頁冊數:	1 online resource (120 pages)
附註:	Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 85-07, Section: B.
Contained By:	Dissertations Abstracts International85-07B.
標題:	Health sciences. -
電子資源:	click for full text (PQDT)
ISBN:	9798381428988

Associations With Gaps in Standardized Methods for Measuring Social Determinants of Health When Compared With State and County Level 2019, 2020, and 2023 Methods for Measuring Health Outcomes in Five Southeast States.
Mullen, Barry Kenneth.

Associations With Gaps in Standardized Methods for Measuring Social Determinants of Health When Compared With State and County Level 2019, 2020, and 2023 Methods for Measuring Health Outcomes in Five Southeast States. - 1 online resource (120 pages)

Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 85-07, Section: B.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Trident University International, 2024.

Includes bibliographical references

Background: The study addressed how Social Determinants of Health factors get measured in the United States and how they can be used to help determine and measure health outcomes. In the healthcare industry, over 95 percent of hospitals collect medical information using a form of electronic data input. Over the last few years, Social Determinants of Health has identified potential upstream drivers of poor health outcomes that resulted in higher healthcare costs. Even though Social Determinants of Health data is collected, there needed to be more variability and standardization in integrating information into a patient's health record, linking Social Determinants of Health factor's impact to a health outcome. Purpose: This study used three methods applied in the U.S. for measuring Social Determinants of Health influence on three healthcare industry approaches to measure quality and performance for ascertaining health outcomes. The dependent variables came from three national datasets (2019, 2020, and 2023). Dependent variable one was the 2023 National Hospital Star ratings for quality of patient experiences from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Dependent variable two was the 2020 National Hospital Safety and Quality Ratings, called LeapFrog from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Dependent variable three was the 2019 Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems overall quality and performance Star ratings. The independent variables came from national datasets (2019, 2020, and 2023). Independent variable one was the 2023 U.S. County Health Rankings from the University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute. Independent variable two was the 2020 Social Vulnerability Index from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Independent variable three was from the 2019 Social Deprivation Index from the Robert Graham Center. Methods: The method was a quantitative correlational comparison that investigated whether there were any statistically significant associations between three independent variables and three dependent variables. The independent variables were deidentified as secondary population data from five states by counties for 2019, 2020, and 2023. The data sources were from the 2023 University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute County Health rankings based on their County Health Rankings Model; the 2020 Centers for Disease Prevention and Control's Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry and the 2019 Social Deprivation Index from the Robert Graham Center. The dependent variables were deidentified secondary data from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. The statistical analysis tests used were descriptive, bivariate, and multivariate analyses. The descriptive analyses included the mean, standard deviation, and range. The bivariate analyses consisted of the Related-Samples Wilcoxon Signed Rank test and Friedman's Two-Way Analysis of Variance since the data was determined to be from a non-normal distribution. The multivariate analyses included conducting the Kruskal-Wallis test of the dependent and independent variables with multiple levels between five Southeast states. Results: The null hypothesis for research question one was rejected and showed that there was a statistically significant association between the 2023 U.S. County health rankings when compared with the state-level 2023 Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems hospital star ratings for patient experience satisfaction. The null hypothesis for research question two was rejected and showed that there was a statistically significant association between how Social Determinants of Health were measured at the state level using the 2020 Social Vulnerability Index when compared with the state-level 2020 Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services hospital LeapFrog rating scores for safety and quality. The null hypothesis for research question three was rejected and showed that there was a statistically significant association between how Social Determinants of Health were measured at the state level using the 2019 Social Deprivation Index when compared with the state-level 2019 Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems hospital star ratings for overall quality and performance. Conclusions: The results showed statistically significant associations that could be used to develop further insight as to how the United States measures Social Determinants of Health elements combined with the approaches that the United States healthcare system uses to measure quality, safety, and performance, for opening pathways to the development of a nationally standardized way of measuring health outcomes.Keywords: Social Determinants of Health (SDOH), Health Outcomes, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR).

Electronic reproduction.
Ann Arbor, Mich. :
ProQuest,
2024

Mode of access: World Wide Web

ISBN: 9798381428988Subjects--Topical Terms:

1179212
Health sciences.
Subjects--Index Terms:

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease RegistryIndex Terms--Genre/Form:

554714
Electronic books.

Associations With Gaps in Standardized Methods for Measuring Social Determinants of Health When Compared With State and County Level 2019, 2020, and 2023 Methods for Measuring Health Outcomes in Five Southeast States.
LDR:06754ntm a22004097 4500 001 1152436
005 20241203090554.5
006 m o d
007 cr mn ---uuuuu
008 250605s2024 xx obm 000 0 eng d
020 $a 9798381428988
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI30990564
035 $a AAI30990564
040 $a MiAaPQ $b eng $c MiAaPQ $d NTU
100 1 $a Mullen, Barry Kenneth. $3 1479426
245 1 0 $a Associations With Gaps in Standardized Methods for Measuring Social Determinants of Health When Compared With State and County Level 2019, 2020, and 2023 Methods for Measuring Health Outcomes in Five Southeast States.
264 0 $c 2024
300 $a 1 online resource (120 pages)
336 $a text $b txt $2 rdacontent
337 $a computer $b c $2 rdamedia
338 $a online resource $b cr $2 rdacarrier
500 $a Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 85-07, Section: B.
500 $a Advisor: Cardillo, Carlos;Cromer, Kenneth W.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--Trident University International, 2024.
504 $a Includes bibliographical references
520 $a Background: The study addressed how Social Determinants of Health factors get measured in the United States and how they can be used to help determine and measure health outcomes. In the healthcare industry, over 95 percent of hospitals collect medical information using a form of electronic data input. Over the last few years, Social Determinants of Health has identified potential upstream drivers of poor health outcomes that resulted in higher healthcare costs. Even though Social Determinants of Health data is collected, there needed to be more variability and standardization in integrating information into a patient's health record, linking Social Determinants of Health factor's impact to a health outcome. Purpose: This study used three methods applied in the U.S. for measuring Social Determinants of Health influence on three healthcare industry approaches to measure quality and performance for ascertaining health outcomes. The dependent variables came from three national datasets (2019, 2020, and 2023). Dependent variable one was the 2023 National Hospital Star ratings for quality of patient experiences from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Dependent variable two was the 2020 National Hospital Safety and Quality Ratings, called LeapFrog from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Dependent variable three was the 2019 Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems overall quality and performance Star ratings. The independent variables came from national datasets (2019, 2020, and 2023). Independent variable one was the 2023 U.S. County Health Rankings from the University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute. Independent variable two was the 2020 Social Vulnerability Index from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Independent variable three was from the 2019 Social Deprivation Index from the Robert Graham Center. Methods: The method was a quantitative correlational comparison that investigated whether there were any statistically significant associations between three independent variables and three dependent variables. The independent variables were deidentified as secondary population data from five states by counties for 2019, 2020, and 2023. The data sources were from the 2023 University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute County Health rankings based on their County Health Rankings Model; the 2020 Centers for Disease Prevention and Control's Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry and the 2019 Social Deprivation Index from the Robert Graham Center. The dependent variables were deidentified secondary data from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. The statistical analysis tests used were descriptive, bivariate, and multivariate analyses. The descriptive analyses included the mean, standard deviation, and range. The bivariate analyses consisted of the Related-Samples Wilcoxon Signed Rank test and Friedman's Two-Way Analysis of Variance since the data was determined to be from a non-normal distribution. The multivariate analyses included conducting the Kruskal-Wallis test of the dependent and independent variables with multiple levels between five Southeast states. Results: The null hypothesis for research question one was rejected and showed that there was a statistically significant association between the 2023 U.S. County health rankings when compared with the state-level 2023 Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems hospital star ratings for patient experience satisfaction. The null hypothesis for research question two was rejected and showed that there was a statistically significant association between how Social Determinants of Health were measured at the state level using the 2020 Social Vulnerability Index when compared with the state-level 2020 Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services hospital LeapFrog rating scores for safety and quality. The null hypothesis for research question three was rejected and showed that there was a statistically significant association between how Social Determinants of Health were measured at the state level using the 2019 Social Deprivation Index when compared with the state-level 2019 Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems hospital star ratings for overall quality and performance. Conclusions: The results showed statistically significant associations that could be used to develop further insight as to how the United States measures Social Determinants of Health elements combined with the approaches that the United States healthcare system uses to measure quality, safety, and performance, for opening pathways to the development of a nationally standardized way of measuring health outcomes.Keywords: Social Determinants of Health (SDOH), Health Outcomes, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR).
533 $a Electronic reproduction. $b Ann Arbor, Mich. : $c ProQuest, $d 2024
538 $a Mode of access: World Wide Web
650 4 $a Health sciences. $3 1179212
650 4 $a Toxicology. $3 580973
653 $a Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
653 $a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
653 $a Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
653 $a Health outcomes
653 $a Healthcare Quality and Performance
653 $a Social Determinants of Health
655 7 $a Electronic books. $2 local $3 554714
690 $a 0566
690 $a 0769
690 $a 0383
710 2 $a ProQuest Information and Learning Co. $3 1178819
710 2 $a Trident University International. $b College of Health Sciences. $3 1479427
773 0 $t Dissertations Abstracts International $g 85-07B.
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=30990564 $z click for full text (PQDT)