This site needs JavaScript to work properly. Please enable it to take advantage of the complete set of features!

Skip to main page content

Add to Collections

Your saved search

Name of saved search:

Search terms:

Test search terms

Would you like email updates of new search results?

Yes
No

Email: (change)

Frequency:

Which day?

Which day?

Report format:

Send at most:

Send even when there aren't any new results

Optional text in email:

Your RSS Feed

Comment

. 2015 Jan;150(1):58.

doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2014.2914.

Surgical quality measurement: the good, the bad, and the ugly

Affiliations

Affiliation

¹ Center for Surgical Medical Acute Care Research and Transitions, Birmingham Veterans Administration Hospital, Birmingham, Alabama2Section of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Alabama at Birmingham.

PMID: 25427257
DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2014.2914

Comment

Surgical quality measurement: the good, the bad, and the ugly

Mary T Hawn. JAMA Surg. 2015 Jan.

. 2015 Jan;150(1):58.

doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2014.2914.

Author

Affiliation

¹ Center for Surgical Medical Acute Care Research and Transitions, Birmingham Veterans Administration Hospital, Birmingham, Alabama2Section of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Alabama at Birmingham.

PMID: 25427257
DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2014.2914

No abstract available

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment on

A comparison of 2 surgical site infection monitoring systems.
Ju MH, Ko CY, Hall BL, Bosk CL, Bilimoria KY, Wick EC. Ju MH, et al. JAMA Surg. 2015 Jan;150(1):51-7. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2014.2891. JAMA Surg. 2015. PMID: 25426765

Publication types

Actions

MeSH terms

Actions
Actions
Actions
Actions
Actions
Actions
Actions
Actions

LinkOut - more resources

Full Text Sources
- Ovid Technologies, Inc.
- Silverchair Information Systems
Research Materials
- NCI CPTC Antibody Characterization Program