Abstract
Explicit criteria for assessing the quality of health care should appeal to practitioners because such criteria make possible consistent judgments, openly arrived at. The process of their formulation encourages more critical scrutiny of current practice, identifying what the generality of practitioners can accept, and what is still doubtful. But, as instruments of social control, explicit criteria are a two-edged sword-vehicles for the best that medicine can offer, or instruments of institutionalized and pervasive error. Therefore, it is important to see who controls the criteria, whose perspectives and interests they serve, and what images of quality they render at once concrete and dominant.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: The Milbank Memorial Fund Quarterly. Health and Society
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
