EurekaMag.com logo
+ Site Statistics
References:
53,869,633
Abstracts:
29,686,251
+ Search Articles
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
EurekaMag Most Shared ContentMost Shared
EurekaMag PDF Full Text ContentPDF Full Text
+ PDF Full Text
Request PDF Full TextRequest PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on FacebookFollow on Facebook
Follow on TwitterFollow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedInFollow on LinkedIn

+ Translate

Change in the process for organizations in which their survey reports meet a rule for conditional accreditation or preliminary denial of accreditation decision



Change in the process for organizations in which their survey reports meet a rule for conditional accreditation or preliminary denial of accreditation decision



Joint Commission Perspectives. Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations 24(9): 7-7




(PDF emailed within 1 workday: $29.90)

Accession: 048483490

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 15484653



Related references

REVISED: Accreditation with Follow-up Survey and Preliminary Denial of Accreditation Decision Processes for Organizations Undergoing Resurvey. Joint Commission Perspectives. Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations 35(3): 1, 3, 5-1, 3, 5, 2015

Adjusted 2006 thresholds for preliminary denial of accreditation and conditional accreditation for hospitals. Joint Commission Perspectives. Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations 26(5): 1, 3-1, 3, 2006

Approved: 2008 thresholds for conditional accreditation and preliminary denial of accreditation. Joint Commission Perspectives. Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations 27(12): 4, 11-4, 11, 2008

2005 thresholds for Conditional Accreditation and Preliminary Denial of Accreditation. Joint Commission Perspectives. Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations 24(11): 3-3, 2004

2007 thresholds for Conditional Accreditation and Preliminary Denial of Accreditation. Joint Commission Perspectives. Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations 26(12): 1, 3-1, 3, 2007

APPROVED: Decision rule for a preliminary denial of accreditation eliminated. Joint Commission Perspectives. Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations 29(12): 4-4, 2010

Accreditation process revised for adverse decisions. Decision appeal process and conditional accreditation affected. Joint Commission Perspectives. Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations 16(1): 4-5, 1995

Does accreditation stimulate change? A study of the impact of the accreditation process on Canadian healthcare organizations. Implementation Science 5(): 31-31, 2010

Potential outcomes of type Is explained. Conditional accreditation twice in one accreditation cycle triggers PDA rule. Joint Commission Perspectives. Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations 22(6): 2-3, 2002

Revisions to 2012 decision rules for Contingent Accreditation. Changes cover fraud and abuse and organizations new to accreditation. Joint Commission Perspectives. Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations 32(1): 8-9, 2012

On accreditation of healthcare organizations. The accreditation decision: how is it made?. Home Care Provider 1(2): 107-109, 1996

The accreditation process: an update on the Joint Commission on the Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations. Kentucky Hospitals Magazine 13(1): 6-8, 1994

Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations. Public information policy. The accreditation cycle: official accreditation policies and procedures. Joint Commission Perspectives. Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations 18(1): Pip1-Pip4, 1997

APPROVED: New preliminary denial of accreditation process. Joint Commission Perspectives. Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations 29(12): 7-7, 2010

The use of a mini-accreditation program to prepare for a CCHFA (Canadian Council on Health Facilities Accreditation) accreditation survey. Canadian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy 43(4): 183-5, 196, 1990