1. Taffé P, Burnand B, Wietlisbach V, Vader J. Influence of clinical and economic factors on the expert rating of appropriateness of preoperative use of recombinant erythropoietin in elective orthopedic surgery patients. Med Decis Making. 2004;24:122-130.
2.
2. Phelps CE. The methodologic foundations of studies of the appropriateness of medical care. N Engl J Med. 1993;329:1241-1245.
3.
3. Kassirer JP. The quality of care and the quality of measuring it. N Engl J Med. 1993;329:1263-1265.
4.
4. Hicks NR. Some observations on attempts to measure appropriateness of care. BMJ. 1994;309:730-733.
5.
5. Kahan JP, Park RE, Leape LL, et al. Variations by specialty in physician ratings of the appropriateness and necessity of indications for procedures. Med Care. 1996;34:512-523.
6.
6. Shekelle PG, Kahan JP, Bernstein SJ, Leape LL, Kamberg CJ, Park RE. The reproducibility of a method to identify the overuse and underuse of medical procedures. N Engl J Med. 1998;338:1888-1895.
7.
7. Tobacman JK, Scott IU, Cyphert S, Zimmerman B. Reproducibility of measures of overuse of cataract surgery by three physician panels. Med Care. 1999;37:937-945.
8.
8. Merrick NJ, Fink A, Park RE, et al. Derivation of clinical indications for carotid endarterectomy by an expert panel. Am J Public Health. 1987;77:187-190.
9.
9. Selby JV, Fireman BH, Lundstrom RJ, et al. Variation among hospitals in coronary angiography practices and outcomes after myocardial infarction in a large health maintenance organization. N Engl J Med. 1996;1888-1896.
10.
10. Normand ST, Landrum MB, Guadagnoli E, et al. Validating recommendations for coronary angiography following acute myocardial infarction in the elderly: a matched analysis using propensity scores. J Clin Epidemiol. 2001;54:387-398.
11.
11. Shekelle PG, Chassin MR, Park RE. Assessing the predictive validity of the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method criteria for performing carotid endarterectomy. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1998;14:707-727.
12.
12. Kravitz RL, Laouri M, Kahan JP, et al Validity of criteria used for detecting underuse of coronary revascularization. JAMA. 1995;274:632-638.
13.
13. Hemingway H, Crook AM, Feder G, et al. Underuse of coronary revascularization procedures in patients considered appropriate candidates for revascularization. N Engl J Med. 2001;344:645-654.
14.
14. Oddone EZ, Samsa G, Matchar DB. Global judgments versus decision-model-facilitated judgments: are experts internally consistent? Med Decis Making. 1994;14:19-26.
15.
15. McClellan M, Brook RH. Appropriateness of care: a comparison of global and outcome methods to set standards. Med Care. 1992;30:565-586.
16.
16. Silverstein MD, Ballard DJ. Expert panel assessment of appropriateness of abdominal aortic aneurysm surgery: global judgement versus probability estimation. J Health Serv Res Policy. 1998;3:134-140.
17.
17. Shekelle PG, Park RE, Kahan JP, Leape LL, Kamberg CJ, Bernstein SJ. Sensitivity and specificity of the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method to identify the overuse and underuse of coronary revascularization and hysterectomy. J Clin Epidemiol. 2001;54:1004-1010.
18.
18. Chassin MR, Kosecoff J, Prk RE, et al. The appropriateness of selected medical and surgical procedures: relationship to geographical variations. Assoc Health Serv Res Health Admin Press. 1989;1-159.
19.
19. Barsness GW, Peterson ED, Ohman EM, et al. Relationship between diabetes mellitus and long-term survival after coronary bypass and angioplasty. Circulation. 1997;96:2551-2556.
20.
20. Washington DL, Bernstein SJ, Kahan JP, Leape LL, Kamberg CJ, Shekelle PG. Reliability of clinical guideline development using mail-only versus in-person expert panels. Med Care. 2003;41:1374-1381.
