HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Purchase Article View Shopping Cart Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Donabedian, A Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Donabedian, A

Criteria, norms and standards of quality: what do they mean?

A Donabedian

Quality assessment requires specification of: 1) a set of phenomena that are usually attributes of either process or outcome; 2) a general rule of what constitutes goodness; and 3) a precise numerical statement of what constitutes acceptable or optimal goodness with respect to each of these phenomena. The terms "criteria," "norms," and "standards," as currently employed, do not correspond well with these three components, but they could be used effectively if the basic distinctions were understood. Alternatively, one could use, as corresponding terms, "elements," "parameters," and "standards." The terms "criteria," and "norms" would then be redefined and be available to be used more uniformly, while "standards" could be further differentiated according to method of measurement, configuration, level, and flexibility.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				E. J. Mullen Choosing Outcome Measures in Systematic Reviews: Critical Challenges Research on Social Work Practice, January 1, 2006; 16(1): 84 - 90. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. J. McQueen Overview of Evidence-based Medicine: Challenges for Evidence-based Laboratory Medicine Clin. Chem., August 1, 2001; 47(8): 1536 - 1546. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. Aharony and S. Strasser Patient Satisfaction: What we Know about and What we Still Need to Explore Med Care Res Rev, March 1, 1993; 50(1): 49 - 79. [PDF]