From: Patient complexity in quality comparisons for glycemic control: An observational study
 | Adjusted rank | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
 | 8.0% | 8.5% | 9.0% | 9.5% |
Top ten performers, unadjusted rank | Â | Â | Â | Â |
1 | 30 | 7 | 3 | 29 |
2 | 11 | 33 | 31 | 20 |
3 | 40 | 40 | 30 | 11 |
4 | 56 | 34 | 48 | 3 |
5 | 36 | 56 | 9 | 56 |
6 | 29 | 17 | 35 | 38 |
7 | 39 | 23 | 28 | 46 |
8 | 51 | 42 | 50 | 33 |
9 | 22 | 41 | 32 | 37 |
10 | 37 | 48 | 43 | 28 |
Number among top ten performers, unadjusted, who would be ranked as top ten performers with adjustment | 0 | 1 | 2 | 1 |
Bottom ten performers, unadjusted rank | Â | Â | Â | Â |
57 | 50 | 58 | 5 | 34 |
58 | 4 | 50 | 12 | 21 |
59 | 3 | 60 | 57 | 60 |
60 | 58 | 51 | 59 | 10 |
61 | 52 | 53 | 53 | 5 |
62 | 57 | 3 | 56 | 55 |
63 | 8 | 55 | 4 | 2 |
64 | 20 | 16 | 23 | 26 |
65 | 38 | 6 | 44 | 27 |
66 | 54 | 49 | 6 | 44 |
Number among bottom ten performers, unadjusted, who would be ranked as top ten performers with adjustment | 2 | 2 | 3 | 3 |