ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners1998
Assessment of management in general practice: validation of a practice visit method.
Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 1998. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Practice visits as a tool in quality improvement: mutual visits and feedback by peers compared with visits and feedback by non-physician observers.Quality in health care : QHC · 1999Trial
- Practice visits as a tool in quality improvement: acceptance and feasibility.Quality in health care : QHC · 1999Trial
- Patient experiences with family medicine: a longitudinal study after the Dutch health care reforms in 2006.BMC family practice · 2016Article
- Effect of accreditation on the quality of chronic disease management: a comparative observational study.BMC family practice · 2014Observational
- Organizational determinants of high-quality routine diabetes care.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2014Article
- Practice size, financial sharing and quality of care.BMC health services research · 2013Article
- Are family practice trainers and their host practices any better? Comparing practice trainers and non-trainers and their practices.BMC family practice · 2013Article
- Experience as a doctor in the developing world: does it benefit the clinical and organisational performance in general practice?BMC family practice · 2009Article
- High workload and job stress are associated with lower practice performance in general practice: an observational study in 239 general practices in the Netherlands.BMC health services research · 2009Article
- Integrating performance assessment, maintenance of competence, and continuing professional development of community pharmacists.American journal of pharmaceutical education · 2007Review
- Do single handed practices offer poorer care? Cross sectional survey of processes and outcomes.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2001Article
- Patients in Europe evaluate general practice care: an international comparison.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2000Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPractice management (PM) in general practice is as yet ill-defined; a systematic description of its domain, as well as a valid method to assess it, are necessary for research and assessment.
aimTo develop and validate a method to assess PM of general practitioners (GPs) and practices.
methodRelevant and potentially discriminating indicators were selected from a systematic framework of 2410 elements of PM to be used in an assessment method (VIP = visit instrument PM). The method was first tested in a pilot study and, after revision, was evaluated in order to select discriminating indicators and to determine validity of dimensions (factor and reliability analysis, linear regression).
resultsOne hundred and ten GPs were assessed with the practice visit method using 249 indicators; 208 of these discriminated sufficiently at practice level or at GP level. Factor analysis resulted in 34 dimensions and in a taxonomy of PM. Dimensions and indicators showed marked variation between GPs and practices. Training practices scored higher on five dimensions; single-handed and dispensing practices scored lower on delegated tasks, but higher on accessibility and availability.
conclusionA visit method to assess PM has been developed and its validity studied systematically. The taxonomy and dimensions of PM were in line with other classifications. Selection of a balanced number of useful and relevant indicators was nevertheless difficult. The dimensions could discriminate between groups of GPs and practices, establishing the value of the method for assessment. The VIP method could be an important contribution to the introduction of continuous quality improvement in the profession.
Indexed as
Identifiers
10198481PMC1313265What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.