Experimental studies to improve the reliability and validity of regulatory judgments on health care in the Netherlands: a randomized controlled trial and before and after case study. Issue 4 (12th May 2014)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Tuijn, Saskia M.; van den Bergh, Huub; Robben, Paul; Janssens, Frans
• Is Part Of: Journal of evaluation in clinical practice. Volume 20:Issue 4(2014)
• Page Start: 352
• Page End: 361
• Publication Date: 2014-05-12
• Subjects: Clinical medicine -- Periodicals; 616.005
• DOI: 10.1111/jep.12136
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1356-1294

Abstract

<abstract abstract-type="main"> <title>Abstract</title> <sec id="jep12136-sec-0001" sec-type="section"> <title>Rationale, aims and objectives</title> <p>We examined the effect of two interventions on both the reliability and validity of regulatory judgments: adjusting the regulatory instrument and attending a consensus meeting.</p> </sec> <sec id="jep12136-sec-0002" sec-type="section"> <title>Method</title> <p>We adjusted the regulatory instrument. With a randomized controlled trial (RCT) we examined the effect of the adjustments we made to the instrument. In the consensus meeting inspectors discussed cases and had to reach consensus about the order of the cases. We used a before and after case study to assess the effect of the consensus meeting. We compared the judgments assigned in the RCT with the unadjusted instrument with the judgments assigned with the unadjusted instrument after the consensus meeting. Moreover we explored the effect of increasing the number of inspectors per regulatory visit based on the estimates of the two interventions.</p> </sec> <sec id="jep12136-sec-0003" sec-type="section"> <title>Results</title> <p>The consensus meeting improved the agreement between inspectors; the variance between inspectors was smallest (0.03) and the reliability coefficient was highest (0.59). Validity is assessed by examining the relation between the assigned judgments and the corporate standard and expressed by a correlation coefficient. This coefficient was highest after the consensus meeting (0.48). Adjustment of the instrument did not increase reliability and validity coefficients.</p> </sec> <sec id="jep12136-sec-0004" sec-type="section"> <title>Conclusions</title> <p>Participating in a consensus meeting improved reliability and validity. Increasing the number of inspectors resulted in both higher reliability and validity values. Organizing consensus meetings and increasing the number of inspectors per regulatory visit seem to be valuable interventions for improving regulatory judgments.</p> </sec> </abstract>