We thank Sypek and colleagues for their response to our article1 and their discussion regarding appropriate identification and management of outliers from clinical quality registries. We agree that outliers may occur at both site and clinician level; however, issues of statistical validity are particularly pertinent at the clinician level, where activity volume is generally lower and there are potential consequences for the individual clinician.
- 1. Ahern S, Hopper I, Evans S. Clinical quality registries for clinician level reporting: strengths and limitations. Med J Aust 2017; 206: 427-429. <MJA full text>
- 2. Spiegelhalter D, Grigg O, Kinsman R, Treasure T. Risk-adjusted sequential probability ratio tests: applications to Bristol, Shipman and adult cardiac surgery. Int J Qual Health Care 2003; 15: 7-13.
- 3. Morris EJ, Taylor EF, Thomas JD, et al. Thirty-day postoperative mortality after colorectal cancer surgery in England. Gut 2011; 60: 806-813.
- 4. Grant SW, Grayson AD, Jackson M, et al. Does the choice of risk-adjustment model influence the outcome of surgeon specific mortality analysis? A retrospective analysis of 14 637 patients under 31 surgeons. BMJ 2015; 94: 37-43.
- 5. Griffen D, Callahan CD, Markwell S, et al. Application of statistical process control to physician-specific emergency department patient satisfaction scores: a novel use of the funnel plot. Acad Emerg Med 2012; 19: 348-355.
- 6. Seaton SE, Manktelow BN. The probability of being identified as an outlier with commonly used funnel plot control limits for the standardised mortality ratio. BMC Med Res Methodol 2012; 12: 98-106.
Publication of your online response is subject to the Medical Journal of Australia's editorial discretion. You will be notified by email within five working days should your response be accepted.