3026.0: Monday, October 22, 2001 - 1:00 PM

Abstract #28400

Target-setting methods for State Health Department

Sunny Kim, PhD1, Ruth O. Schrock, MPH2, Lynn H. Giljahn, MPH2, and Candace Taylor, PhD2. (1) Center for Biostatistics, The Ohio State University, M200 Starling-Loving, 320 West 10th Avenue., Columbus, OH 43210, (614)293-6897, Kim.747@osu.edu, (2) Ohio Department of Health

Objectives: Although it is controversial to employ targets for the performance of public health services, the criticisms are mostly on methodological issues. It is important to set measurable targets to assess the progress of public health services. The Healthy People 2010 provided the national targets for various health indicators. Similarly, States should set attainable targets adjusted to their own priorities. To help set realistic targets, some statistical methods were suggested. However, certain methods shouldn°¯t be used in some circumstances. The purpose of this paper is to discuss the advantages and disadvantages of each target-setting method. We also want to discuss some common mistakes found in target-setting methods and their interpretation. Methods: Advantages and disadvantages of each target-setting method are illustrated using an example. Target-setting methods include i) "better than best", ii) annual percent change, iii) percent decrease to meet national goal, iv) linear regression, and v) the method of finding statistically significant differences. Results: Since the annual percent change method assumes the linear trend over time, it calculates correct target only if the trend is linear. If a health indicator shows the log-linear or curvilinear trend, linear regression method could be used. Since linear regression shows R-square and residuals, we can find the parametric forms of health indicators. We also found that the method of statistically significant difference is not helpful. Conclusions: To help to set the targets, correct statistical method should be used. Quality data should be integrated with whatever quantitative approach is applied.

Learning Objectives: At the conclusion of the session, the participant (learner) in this session will be able to: 1. List five target-setting methods 2. Discuss the advantages/disadvantages of each target-setting method. 3. Recognize the common mistakes in target-setting 4. Use the target-setting methods properly

Keywords: Health Objectives, Performance Measurement

Presenting author's disclosure statement:
Organization/institution whose products or services will be discussed: None
Disclosure not received
Relationship: Not Received.

The 129th Annual Meeting of APHA