1 Hibbard JH. What can we say about the impact of public reporting? Inconsistent execution yields variable results. Ann Intern Med 2008;148:160–1. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-148-2-200801150-00011
2 Bilimoria KY, Cohen ME, Merkow RP, et al. Comparison of Outlier Identification Methods in Hospital Surgical Quality Improvement Programs. J Gastrointest Surg 2010;14:1600–7. doi:10.1007/s11605-010-1316-6
3 Krumholz HM, Lin Z, Normand S-LT. Measuring hospital clinical outcomes. 2013.
4 Lingsma HF, Steyerberg EW, Eijkemans MJC, et al. Comparing and ranking hospitals based on outcome: Results from The Netherlands Stroke Survey. QJM 2009;103:99–108. doi:10.1093/qjmed/hcp169
5 Lingsma HF, Roozenbeek B, Li B, et al. Large Between-Center Differences in Outcome After Moderate and Severe Traumatic Brain Injury in the International Mission on Prognosis and Clinical Trial Design in Traumatic Brain Injury (IMPACT) Study. Neurosurgery 2011;68:601–8. doi:10.1227/NEU.0b013e318209333b
6 Van Dishoeck AM, Koek MBG, Steyerberg EW, et al. Use of surgical-site infection rates to rank hospital performance across several types of surgery. Br J Surg 2013;100:628–37. doi:10.1002/bjs.9039
7 Seaton SE, Barker L, Lingsma HF, et al. What is the probability of detecting poorly performing hospitals using funnel plots? BMJ Qual Saf 2013;22:870–6. doi:10.1136/bmjqs-2012-001689
8 Jarman B, Pieter D, Van Der Veen AA, et al. The hospital standardised mortality ratio: A powerful tool for Dutch hospitals to assess their quality of care? Qual Saf Heal Care 2010;19:9–13. doi:10.1136/qshc.2009.032953
9 Jarman B, Gault S, Alves B, et al. Explaining differences in English hospital death rates using routinely collected data. BMJ 1999;318:1515–20. doi:10.1136/BMJ.318.7197.1515
10 Tu YK, Gilthorpe MS. Revisiting the relation between change and initial value: A review and evaluation. Stat. Med. 2007;26:443–57. doi:10.1002/sim.2538
11 Van Den Bosch WF, Kelder JC, Wagner C. Predicting hospital mortality among frequently readmitted patients: HSMR biased by readmission. BMC Health Serv Res 2011;11:57. doi:10.1186/1472-6963-11-57
12 van Gestel YRBM, Rutten HJT, de Hingh IHJT, et al. The standardised mortality ratio is unreliable for assessing quality of care in rectal cancer. Neth J Med 2013;71:209–14.
13 Van Gestel YRBM, Lemmens VEPP, Lingsma HF, et al. The hospital standardized mortality ratio fallacy: A narrative review. Med. Care. 2012;50:662–7. doi:10.1097/MLR.0b013e31824ebd9f
14 MacCallum RC, Zhang S, Preacher KJ, et al. On the practice of dichotomization of quatitative variables. Psychol. Methods. 2002;7:19–40. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.7.1.19
15 Altman DG, Royston P. The cost of dichotomising continuous variables. BMJ 2006;332:1080. doi:10.1136/bmj.332.7549.1080
16 Royston P, Altman DG, Sauerbrei W. Dichotomizing continuous predictors in multiple regression: A bad idea. Stat Med 2006;25:127–41. doi:10.1002/sim.2331
17 Maas AI, Murray G, Henney H, et al. Efficacy and safety of dexanabinol in severe traumatic brain injury: results of a phase III randomised, placebo-controlled, clinical trial. Lancet Neurol 2006;5:38–45. doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(05)70253-2
18 Valenta Z, Pitha J, Poledne R. Proportional odds logistic regression - Effective means of dealing with limited uncertainty in dichotomizing clinical outcomes. Stat Med 2006;25:4227–34. doi:10.1002/sim.2678
19 Roozenbeek B, Lingsma HF, Perel P, et al. The added value of ordinal analysis in clinical trials: an example in traumatic brain injury. Crit Care 2011;15:R127–R127. doi:10.1186/cc10240
20 McHugh GS, Butcher I, Steyerberg EW, et al. A simulation study evaluating approaches to the analysis of ordinal outcome data in randomized controlled trials in traumatic brain injury: Results from the IMPACT Project. Clin Trials 2010;7:44–57. doi:10.1177/1740774509356580
21 Saver JL. Novel end point analytic techniques and interpreting shifts across the entire range of outcome scales in acute stroke trials. Stroke 2007;38:3055–62. doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.107.488536
22 Marmarou A, Lu J, Butcher I, et al. IMPACT database of traumatic brain injury: Design and description. J Neurotrauma 2007;24:239–50. doi:10.1089/neu.2006.0036
23 Dirks M, Niessen LW, Van Wijngaarden JDH, et al. Promoting thrombolysis in acute ischemic stroke. Stroke 2011;42:1325–30. doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.110.596940
24 Goyal M, Menon BK, Van Zwam WH, et al. Endovascular thrombectomy after large-vessel ischaemic stroke: A meta-analysis of individual patient data from five randomised trials. Lancet 2016;387:1723–31. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(16)00163-X
25 Li B, Lingsma HF, Steyerberg EW, et al. Logistic random effects regression models: a comparison of statistical packages for binary and ordinal outcomes. BMC Med Res Methodol 2011;11:77. doi:10.1186/1471-2288-11-77
26 Brant R. Assessing Proportionality in the Proportional Odds Model for Ordinal Logistic Regression. Biometrics 1990;46:1171. doi:10.2307/2532457
27 RStudio Team. RStudio: Integrated Development Environment for R. 2015.
28 R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. 2016.
29 Feng D. miscF: Miscellaneous Functions. 2016.
30 Yee TW. VGAM: Vector Generalized Linear and Additive Models. 2016.
31 Elff M. memisc: Tools for Management of Survey Data and the Presentation of Analysis Results. 2016.
32 Harrell Jr. FE. Hmisc: Harrell Miscellaneous. 2016.
33 Harrell, Jr. FE. rms: Regression Modeling Strategies. 2016.
34 Savitz SI, Benatar M, Saver JL, et al. Outcome analysis in clinical trial design for acute stroke: Physicians’ attitudes and choices. Cerebrovasc Dis 2008;26:156–62. doi:10.1159/000139663
35 Saver JL, Gornbein J. Treatment effects for which shift or binary analyses are advantageous in acute stroke trials. Neurology 2009;72:1310–5. doi:10.1212/01.wnl.0000341308.73506.b7
36 Bath PMW, Lees KR, Schellinger PD, et al. Statistical analysis of the primary outcome in acute stroke trials. Stroke 2012;43:1171–8. doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.111.641456
37 Machado SG, Murray GD, Teasdale GM. Evaluation of designs for clinical trials of neuroprotective agents in head injury. J Neurotrauma 1999;16:1131–8. doi:10.1089/neu.1999.16.1131
38 Bolland K, Sooriyarachchi MR, Whitehead J. Sample size review in a head injury trial with ordered categorical responses. In: Statistics in Medicine. 1998. 2835–47. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19981230)17:24<2835::AID-SIM933>3.0.CO;2-8
39 Bath PMW, Gray LJ, Collier T, et al. Can we improve the statistical analysis of stroke trials? Statistical reanalysis of functional outcomes in stroke trials. Stroke 2007;38:1911–5. doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.106.474080
40 Maas AR, Steyerberg E, Marmarou A, et al. IMPACT recommendations for improving the design and analysis of clinical trials in moderate to severe traumatic brain injury. Neurotherapeutics 2010;7:127–34. doi:10.1016/j.nurt.2009.10.020
41 Senn S, Julious S. Measurement in clinical trials: A neglected issue for statistician. Stat Med 2009;:3189–3209. doi:10.1002/sim.3603
42 Van Swieten JC, Koudstaal PJ, Visser MC, et al. Interobserver agreement for the assessment of handicap in stroke patients. Stroke 1988;19:604–7. doi:10.1161/01.STR.19.5.604
43 Wilson JTL, Hareendran A, Grant M, et al. Improving the assessment of outcomes in stroke: Use of a structured interview to assign grades on the modified Rankin Scale. Stroke 2002;33:2243–6. doi:10.1161/01.STR.0000027437.22450.BD
44 Quinn TJ, Dawson J, Walters MR, et al. Reliability of the modified rankin scale: A systematic review. Stroke 2009;40:3393–5. doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.109.557256
45 Lu J, Murray GD, Steyerberg EW, et al. Effects of Glasgow Outcome Scale Misclassification on Traumatic Brain Injury Clinical Trials. J Neurotrauma 2008;25:641–51. doi:10.1089/neu.2007.0510
46 Choi SC, Clifton GL, Marmarou A, et al. Misclassification and treatment effect on primary outcome measures in clinical trials of severe neurotrauma. J Neurotrauma 2002;19:17–22. doi:10.1089/089771502753460204
47 Van Dishoeck AM, Lingsma HF, Mackenbach JP, et al. Random variation and rankability of hospitals using outcome indicators. BMJ Qual Saf 2011;20:869–74. doi:10.1136/bmjqs.2010.048058