I know, I know...this is not the highest impact journal you've ever seen.  But, guess what, good stuff can be found all over the literature...and here's one now.

This interesting work nicely highlights an important point:  it's one thing to say we have quality issues in US healthcare, and it's quite another to have some common ground on how we approach those issues.

Bottom line, as the article highlights, is this:  until we have a common framework about what exactly quality means in healthcare, it's going to be very difficult to make any improvement.

And, guess what, right now we have significant issues with a common definition of exactly what quality means in healthcare.  (More on that herehereand here too.)

As for me, I generally use a Bayes' Theorem framework to decide how much testing is rational when it comes to questions of over or under-testing...but this article says I may need to use a different framework at different times.

Take a look at the article.  What about you?  Where do you fall and which framework do you use?