Submit a manuscript Sign up for article alerts Contact us

RSS

Latest comments

Letter to the editor: Critics and Comments to the article (Sandeep Kumar Panigrahi, 15 January 2015)

I congratulate the authors for coming up with an interesting paper from the analysis of WHO SAGE secondary data. I would like to give few comments and would like to request the authors to address some queries. This would clarify similar doubts of other readers. Some studies and survey in USA and UK show that prevalence of obesity is more common in women of lower Socio-economic strata, while in men it is same for all income levels. Since NCD has relation with obesity how does it fit in this case, where epidemiological trends have come out to be something different in India. What can be the reasons have not been discussed in the discussion section. Second is that how can number of non-communicable diseases be said as continuous variable and analysis done accordingly? To my belief, it is... read full comment

Comment on: Pati et al. BMC Health Services Research, 14:451

Summary of article (Ralisa Shape, 30 October 2014)

Summary & Critique of... read full comment

Comment on: Demain et al. BMC Health Services Research, 13:334

Erratum (Kevin Gorey, 24 September 2014)

There is an error in the second paragraph of the background section. This sentence is in error.  Third, recent population-based studies of colon cancer care in California and Ontario suggested that people of color, including black people of various ethnic backgrounds, with colon cancer are much better served in California [16-18].  It should read as follows. 
Third, recent population-based studies of colon cancer care in California and Ontario suggested that people of color, including black people of various ethnic backgrounds, with colon cancer are much better served in Ontario [16-18].

read full comment

Comment on: Gorey et al. BMC Health Services Research, 14:133

Error in affiliation Dr. Tim Quinlan (Carolien Aantjes, 05 August 2014)

The correct affiliations of Dr. Tim Quinlan are VU University and HEARD, KwaZulu-Natal University. read full comment

Comment on: Aantjes et al. BMC Health Services Research, 14:295

Minor correction to be noted (David Goldsbury, 01 August 2014)

Dear Editors The authors have discovered a minor error in this paper. In the Results section, second paragraph, the third sentence needs to be corrected as follows. “Sensitivity of the MBS claims data was highest for men who had private health insurance (89% vs 28% for those with no private health insurance, p < 0.0001) and for those living in major cities (80% vs 55% for those living in outer regional areas, p < 0.0001).” In the published version, the results for private health insurance and no health insurance are reversed. No other part of the article is affected.   Kind regards David Goldsbury on behalf of the authors   read full comment

Comment on: Goldsbury et al. BMC Health Services Research, 11:253

Typographical Error (Marissa Constand, 15 July 2014)

It has come to the attention of the authors that a typographical error exists in the opening line of the Background section.  Please note that "tenants" should actually be "tenets".  The authors appologize for any confusion. read full comment

Comment on: Constand et al. BMC Health Services Research, 14:271

The information of the first author is as follows: (Hailun Chao, 09 June 2014)

Chienhung Lin, MD
Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Chi-Mei Medical Center And Department of Optometry, Chung-Hwa University of Medical Technology, Tainan, Taiwan read full comment

Comment on: Lin et al. BMC Health Services Research, 12:339

A Searchable Database of Doctors (M Graham, 18 September 2013)

An opportunity presents itself, if technology companies begin to invest in the development of IT services for patient care. If the national registry was a searchable database of practitioners which Jamaicans could use to find a doctor , perhaps this could provide an incentive for practitioners to keep current read full comment

Comment on: Knight-Madden et al. BMC Health Services Research, 8:253

Perspective is crucial (Ellen Schultz, 10 May 2013)

This article highlights the critical importance of considering perspective when addressing care planning and care coordination. From a distance, all the clinicians who participated in this study might be considered to represent the same perspective--that of health care professionals from within the same health care system--yet as so clearly demonstrated through the experience of this study, they are very much not "on the same page." The disconnect between those participants from the primary care setting who were oriented towards patients and supportive care needs and the participants from the hospital setting who were oriented towards particular diseases underscores the depth of fragmentation--cultural as well as structural--in this particular health system. Experience suggests that this... read full comment

Comment on: Røsstad et al. BMC Health Services Research, 13:121

Comments on Interpretation of Findings in Article on Primary Health Care in Rural Malawi (Nadi Kaonga, 24 April 2013)

Dear Editors of the BMC Health Services Research Journal and Authors of the Manuscript by Makaula et al... read full comment

Comment on: Makaula et al. BMC Health Services Research, 12:328

Erratum: efficiency rates (Kirsten van Steenbergen-Weijenburg, 11 December 2012)

Unfortunately, inadvertently a printing error occurred in the calculation of the efficiency rates in Table 3 and in Table 4 in the article. Therefore, the efficiency rates were too low. The actual efficiency rates are higher. We apologize and offer the Erratum with correct efficiency rates for both Tables. The efficiency rates were not mentioned in the text and the change does not affect the primary outcomes and the conclusions that are discussed in the article. We apologize for the inconvenience. Table 3: Score ¿8 = Efficiency 65.5% Score ¿9 = Efficiency 67.5% Score ¿10 = Efficiency 69.5% Score ¿11 = Efficiency 75.6% Score ¿12 = Efficiency 79.2% Table 4 PHQ 0-27 = Efficiency 81.7% Score >10 = Efficiency 63.7% read full comment

Comment on: van Steenbergen-Weijenburg et al. BMC Health Services Research, 10:235

Associated article with the results in press (Matthias Briner, 05 October 2012)

The article with the results from the first monitoring of CRM in Switzerland is in press: Briner, M., Manser, T. and Kessler, O. (2012). Clinical risk management in hospitals: Strategy, central coordination and dialogue as key enablers. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice. in press. You can find it in Pubmed: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22409240 read full comment

Comment on: Briner et al. BMC Health Services Research, 10:337

Useful reference? (George Peat, 27 September 2012)

I read with interest your protocol and wondered if our previous trial of pharmacist review of osteoarthritis patients' medication would be of interest
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1635605/
Best of luck with the study. read full comment

Comment on: Tan et al. BMC Health Services Research, 12:246

The conclusion that competition caused improved satisfaction is flawed (Robert Grant, 01 June 2012)

The analyses carried out by Ikkersheim and Koolman are thorough and entirely appropriate, but the conclusion of this paper that competition and publication of satisfaction statistics caused improvements in patient satisfaction is far from justified. The conclusions are subject to four major... read full comment

Comment on: Ikkersheim et al. BMC Health Services Research, 12:76

There are some typographical errors in table 5 (ketkesone Phrasisombath, 27 March 2012)

There are some typographical errors in table 5 and the corrections should be as follows:

Main source of information among those who had or had not sought treatment for RTI/STI

Yes (sought)
Boyfriends n=13 (5.5%)
TV n=2 (0.8%)

No (had not sought)
HCP during the visit n=11 (9.6%)
Boyfriends n=5 (4.3%)
TV n=5 (4.3%)
Radio n=1 (0.9%) read full comment

Comment on: Phrasisombath et al. BMC Health Services Research, 12:37

Pay for performance in disease management: a systematic review of the literature. (Lance Turtle, 17 February 2012)

This article by de Bruin et al. (1) addresses a critical research question, that is: do pay for performance (P4P) schemes in healthcare result in the delivery of better care? The stated aims in this review were: (i) to provide an overview of P4P schemes that are currently used to stimulate delivery of chronic care through disease management and (ii) to gain insights into the effects of P4P on healthcare quality and healthcare costs... read full comment

Comment on: de Bruin et al. BMC Health Services Research, 11:272

Productivity costs may not drop dramatically when CFS patients avail of current services (Tom Kindlon, 06 January 2012)

The authors appear to do a reasonable job, given the limits of the data available to them, in calculating the productivity costs before Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS) patients reach the services in the UK. However, the reader is left with the impression that the productivity costs will drop dramatically once the patient reaches the services: "We had no data with which to assess the rate at which people with CFS/ME recover and return to work, either with or without specialized treatment. According to a systematic review of the literature, the proportion of adults in employment increased following interventions for CFS/ME (individualised rehabilitation, cognitive behavioural therapy and exercise therapy) and decreased in observational studies with no intervention [1]. Evidence from a recent... read full comment

Comment on: Collin et al. BMC Health Services Research, 11:217

Correction of errors in the manuscript (BARIDALYNE NONGKYNRIH, 21 December 2011)

Table 5 has some printing errors which may please be noted.
The salary in computerized system is INR 1,402,800, the Incremental cost in the salary is therefore INR (-)1,160,400. The total cost in computerized system is INR 1,644,217, and total incremental cost is INR (-) 924,283, which is equivalent to USD (-)19666. read full comment

Comment on: Krishnan et al. BMC Health Services Research, 10:310

Errors in manuscript (Kathleen Finlayson, 23 September 2011)

Please note the following two corrections to the manuscript:
Under the 'Study Conditions' section:
1. under the 'exercise only follow-up intervention group' heading, the sentence should be 'Patients allocated to the exercise only follow-up intervention group will receive only the exercise component of the protocol, that is, protocol steps 2, 3 and 7.
2. uncer the 'in-home telephone follow-up only intervention group' heading, the sentence should read ‘Patients allocated to the in-home/telephone follow-up only intervention group will receive only the APGN component of the protocol, that is, protocol steps 1, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9 and 10.'
read full comment

Comment on: Courtney et al. BMC Health Services Research, 11:202

Errors in Table 1 (Jay Shen, 21 September 2011)

In Table 1, standardized deviation (SD) is missing in one row, that is:

"Number of staffed beds, mean(SD) 176 210 34 413 467 54"

should be:

"Number of staffed beds, mean (SD) 176(14) 210(18) 34 413(20) 467(29) 54"


read full comment

Comment on: Shen et al. BMC Health Services Research, 11:212

A useful approach.. (Martha Ann Carey, 13 September 2011)

A very interesting article, and an interesting use of latent class. read full comment

Comment on: Thorpe et al. BMC Health Services Research, 11:181

Updated additional data file available from the authors (Jeffrey Winters, 22 June 2011)

An updated "additional data file" is available from the authors that includes updated reimbursement data released by CMS in April of 2011. The data file allows readers to input their local data and perform an analysis. Please contact me, as the corresponding author, via email to request the updated additional data file. read full comment

Comment on: Winters et al. BMC Health Services Research, 11:101

Comparing the performances of comorbidity adjustments with and without inclusion of ‘prior hospitalizations’ data (Mansour Taghavi Azar Sharabiani, 22 June 2011)

Based on the C-statistics summarised in Table 3, it seems that the inclusion of 'prior hospitalizations' in the 'index hospitalisation' data results in significant improvements to the predictability of the models that are adjusted for comorbidities (i.e. Baseline model + Charlson/Deyo, Charlson/Romano, or Elixhauser). However, it is possible that these improvements are confounded by the potential improvements to the predictability of the baseline model itself. Thus, the improvements to the predictability could be independent of the performances of the comorbidity adjustment techniques. This issue cannot be settled based on the current results as it seems that the authors have provided only the C-statstics that are related to the predictability of the baseline model for the ‘Index... read full comment

Comment on: Chu et al. BMC Health Services Research, 10:140

Correction by author (Ingibjörg Hjaltadottir, 17 June 2011)

Reference no 20 should be the same as no 40:
Morris JN, Fries BE, Morris SA: Scaling ADLs within the MDS.Journal of Gerontology A Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences 1999, 54:M546-553.

There is a missing line in table 3 under the heading Index of Social Engagement:
Scale:5-6
Gender:Female
Died during years 1-3 n (%):87 (35.7)
Lived longer than 3 years: 157
Total n:244
read full comment

Comment on: Hjaltadóttir et al. BMC Health Services Research, 11:86

Correction to the Table 4 (typos) (Liana Martirosyan, 07 December 2010)

All percentages of prescribing quality scores presented in the table 4 are calculated and shown correctly. However, there have been two typos made in the last steps of manuscript peer-reveiw when providing additional information requested by the reviewers. We apologize for not noticing this earlier.

1.The numerators and denominators for the scores of PQI-1 based on diagnostic codes and clinical measurement are swapped:
93(90-95)numerator and denominator should be:905/984
81(78-83)numerator and denominator should be:1412/1749

2.The numerator for the PQI-3 Prescription of metformin in overweight T2DM patients: should read 139 and not 39: 65(59-72),139/213.

read full comment

Comment on: Martirosyan et al. BMC Health Services Research, 10:137