Originally published in Health Services Research, Volume 43, Issue 3 (June 2008)
There are two corrections to this article:
1) Page 993, the final sentence of the first complete paragraph should read:
To get the Ridit score, we use the empirical distribution of the ordinal variables to score the hospitals, taking one less the sum of the empirical CDF of hospital performance on any measure and the CDF of the hospital that is ranked one level below (which we denote 
in Supplementary Material Appendix A, Implementing PRIDIT by Example).
2) The matrix of Ridit scores in Table 4 of the Supplementary Material Appendix A is incorrect, as it is the negative of the correct matrix. Each non-zero value in the columns labeled Bij (Ridit) was presented with the wrong sign. No conclusions are changed by this correction.
Appendix A Table 4 should be:
| LVF | Beta Blocker | Teaching Status | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hospital Number | Bij (Ridit) | Cumulative Proportion | Bij (Ridit) | Cumulative Proportion | Bij (Ridit) | Cumulative Proportion |
| 1 | −0.90 | 0.10 | −0.90 | 0.10 | −0.30 | 0.70 |
| 2 | −0.70 | 0.20 | −0.70 | 0.20 | 0.70 | 1.00 |
| 3 | 0.00 | 0.60 | −0.30 | 0.40 | −0.30 | 0.70 |
| 4 | 0.70 | 0.90 | −0.10 | 0.50 | −0.30 | 0.70 |
| 5 | 0.50 | 0.80 | 0.60 | 1.00 | 0.70 | 1.00 |
| 6 | −0.30 | 0.40 | 0.60 | 1.00 | 0.70 | 1.00 |
| 7 | −0.50 | 0.30 | 0.10 | 0.60 | −0.30 | 0.70 |
| 8 | 0.30 | 0.70 | 0.60 | 1.00 | −0.30 | 0.70 |
| 9 | 0.00 | 0.60 | −0.50 | 0.30 | −0.30 | 0.70 |
| 10 | 0.90 | 1.00 | 0.60 | 1.00 | −0.30 | 0.70 |
| Sum | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | |||
REFERENCE
- Lieberthal RD. Hospital Quality: A PRIDIT Approach. Health Services Research. 2008;43(3):988–1003. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2007.00821.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]