Volume 60, Issue 5, Pages 1917-1929 (November 2001) Association between prevalent care process measures and facility-specific mortality rates  Edmund G. Lowrie, Ming Teng, Eduardo Lacson, Nancy Lew, J. Michael Lazarus, William F. Owen  Kidney International  Volume 60, Issue 5, Pages 1917-1929 (November 2001) DOI: 10.1046/j.1523-1755.2001.00029.x Copyright © 2001 International Society of Nephrology Terms and Conditions

Figure 1 Bivariate regression analyses of the standardized mortality ratio (SMR) on each Core Indicator. The data are presented in graphic format for 1993 and tabular format for 1994 and 1995. The solid lines indicate the regression line (middle line) and its 95% confidence interval (upper and lower lines). The outer lines indicate the 95% prediction limits and reflect the ability to predict an individual SMR from knowledge of an Indicator value. The estimated regression constants for each of the nine analyses are shown below. Kidney International 2001 60, 1917-1929DOI: (10.1046/j.1523-1755.2001.00029.x) Copyright © 2001 International Society of Nephrology Terms and Conditions

Figure 2 Probability densities for specific mortality rate (SMR) group membership as a function of the percentage of patients out of compliance with Core Indicator hematocrit guideline (A) and the distributions of hematocrit (means ± SE) among the SMR groups (B). F means the F statistic; P means the probability value for rejecting the Null hypothesis. Means accompanied by the same symbol were not significantly different from each other (all P< 0.05). The data are for 1993. Kidney International 2001 60, 1917-1929DOI: (10.1046/j.1523-1755.2001.00029.x) Copyright © 2001 International Society of Nephrology Terms and Conditions

Figure 3 Probability densities for specific morality rate (SMR) group membership as a function of fractional variance from the Core Indicator urea reduction ratio (URR) standard (A) and the distributions of URR (means ± SE) among the SMR groups (B). F means the F statistic; P means the probability value for rejecting the Null hypothesis. Means accompanied by the same symbol were not significantly different from each other (P< 0.05). The data are for 1993. Kidney International 2001 60, 1917-1929DOI: (10.1046/j.1523-1755.2001.00029.x) Copyright © 2001 International Society of Nephrology Terms and Conditions

Figure 4 Probability densities for specific mortality rate (SMR) group membership as a function of fractional variance from the Core Indicator albumin standard (A) and the distributions of albumin (means ± SE) among the SMR groups (B). F means the F-statistic; P means the probability value for rejecting the Null hypothesis. Means accompanied by the same symbol were not significantly different from each other (all P< 0.05). The data are for 1993. Kidney International 2001 60, 1917-1929DOI: (10.1046/j.1523-1755.2001.00029.x) Copyright © 2001 International Society of Nephrology Terms and Conditions