Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2015 Mar 21:15:277.
doi: 10.1186/s12889-015-1454-6.

Exploring the transparency mechanism and evaluating the effect of public reporting on prescription: a protocol for a cluster randomized controlled trial

Xin Du  1 , Dan Wang  2 , Xuan Wang  3 , Shiru Yang  4 , Xinping Zhang  5
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Exploring the transparency mechanism and evaluating the effect of public reporting on prescription: a protocol for a cluster randomized controlled trial

Xin Du et al. BMC Public Health. .

Abstract

Background: The public reporting of health outcomes has become one of the most popular topics and is accepted as a quality improvement method in the healthcare field. However, little research has been conducted on the transparency mechanism, and results are mixed with regard to the evaluation of the effect of public reporting on quality improvement. The objectives of this trial are to investigate the transparency mechanism and to evaluate the effect of public reporting on prescription at the level of individual participants.

Methods/design: This study involves a cluster randomized controlled trial conducted in 20 primary-care facilities (clusters). Eligible clusters are those facilities with excellent hospital information systems and that have agreed to participate in the trial. The 20 clusters are matched into 10 pairs according to Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution score. As the unit of randomization, each pair of facilities is assigned at random to a control or an intervention group through coin flipping. Prescribed ranking information is publicly reported in the intervention group. The public materials include the posters of individuals and of facilities, the ranking lists of general practitioners, and brochures of patients, which are updated monthly. The intervention began on 13th November 2013 and lasted for one year. Specifically, participants are surveyed at five points in time (baseline, quarterly following the intervention) through questionnaires, interviews, and observations. These participants include an average of 600 patients, 300 general practitioners, 15 directors, and 6 health bureau administrators. The primary outcomes are the transparency mechanism model and the changes in medicine-prescribe. Subsequently, the modifications in the transparency mechanism constructs are evaluated. The outcomes are measured at the individual participant level, and the professional who analyzes the data is blind to the randomization status.

Discussion: This study protocol outlines a design that aims to examine the transparency mechanism and to evaluate the effect of public reporting on prescription. The research design is significant in the field of public policy. Furthermore, this study intends to fill the gap of the investigation of the transparency mechanism and the evaluation of public reporting on prescription.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Study framework of the transparency action cycle.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Design of the matched-pair cluster randomized controlled trial.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. HealthSparq. Health Care Transparency a Hot Topic at National Health Insurance Conference -- LAS VEGAS, July 16, 2013 PRNewswire-In.
    1. Hale TN. Transparency, accountability, and global governance. Glob Gov. 2008;14(1):73–94.
    1. Weil D, Fung A, Graham M, Fagotto E. The effectiveness of regulatory disclosure policies. J Policy Anal Manage. 2006;25(1):155–81. doi: 10.1002/pam.20160. - DOI
    1. Atkins L, Smith JA, Kelly MP, Michie S. The process of developing evidence-based guidance in medicine and public health: a qualitative study of views from the inside. Implement Sci. 2013;8:101. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-8-101. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Jung K. The impact of information disclosure on quality of care in HMO markets. Int J Qual Health Care. 2010;22(6):461–8. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzq062. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms