ISI Journal Citation Reports® 2014 Rankings: 1/70 (Health Care Sciences & Services); 2/85 (Health Policy & Services)
|Howard Markel, Editor-in-Chief||Christopher F. Koller, Publisher|
|Tara Strome, Assistant Managing Editor|
From The Current Issue
Department of Corrections
Every editor of every peer-reviewed, scientific journal has the same nightmare. This past May, it came true for the editors of Science when the credibility of a study unraveled—and the editors of that journal had to formally retract the paper. Ever since, editors have been working to develop scientific standards for their publications. The Milbank Quarterly is no exception. In this issue, the Editor-in-Chief announces the Quarterly’s new transparency policy.
Our op-ed section features some of the best minds currently working to improve the public’s health. In addition to our regular op-ed writers, guest contributors include John McDonough, of the Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, who asks whether the fate of the Affordable Care Act has been settled, and George Benjamin, executive director of the American Public Health Association, who writes about the response of health care systems to climate change.
Knowledge of and Attitudes Toward Evidence-Based Guidelines for and Against Clinical Preventive Services: Results from a National Survey
A survey was developed to study consumers’ knowledge of and attitudes toward evidence-based guidelines for and against clinical preventive services, including those developed by the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF). Of 2,529 adults, 36.4% reported knowing that the Affordable Care Act required insurance companies to cover proven preventive services without cost sharing, but only 7.7 % had heard of the USPSTF. One in three reported trusting that a government task force would make fair guidelines. Given the low levels of knowledge and the mistrust about guidelines, better consumer education is needed.
Differing Strategies to Meet Information-Sharing Needs: Publicly Supported Community Health Information Exchanges Versus Health Systems’ Enterprise Health Information Exchanges
Community health information exchanges (HIEs) are offered to any willing provider and often are supported by public funds. Enterprise HIEs are a more recent development, often created by health systems themselves to connect affiliated hospitals and physicians. Given the complex environment of public- and private-sector initiatives, researchers investigated why some health systems participate in community HIE and others establish their own. Although they can be complementary, community and enterprise HIE may compete for providers’ attention and organizational resources. The sustainability of a community HIE as a public good might necessitate ongoing public funding and supportive regulation.