ArticleQuality & safety in health care2003
Assessing the quality of care of multiple conditions in general practice: practical and methodological problems.
Article in Quality & safety in health care, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Quality indicators for the primary care of osteoarthritis: a systematic review.Annals of the rheumatic diseases · 2015Pooled it
- Community health center quality improvement: a systematic review and future directions for research.Progress in community health partnerships : research, education, and action · 2007Pooled it
- Quality of care in inflammatory bowel diseases: What is the best way to better outcomes?World journal of gastroenterology · 2018Review
- Variations in achievement of evidence-based, high-impact quality indicators in general practice: An observational study.PloS one · 2017Observational
- Face-validation of quality indicators for the organization of palliative care in hospitals in Indonesia: a contribution to quality improvement.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2014Article
- AHRQ prevention quality indicators to assess the quality of primary care of local providers: a pilot study from Italy.European journal of public health · 2014Article
- Overall scores as an alternative to global ratings in patient experience surveys; a comparison of four methods.BMC health services research · 2013Article
- Characteristics of primary care practices associated with high quality of care.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2013Article
- Which practice characteristics are associated with the quality of cardiovascular disease prevention in European primary care?Implementation science : IS · 2013Article
- Development and pilot of an internationally standardized measure of cardiovascular risk management in European primary care.BMC health services research · 2011Article
- Cardiovascular disease prevention in rural Nigeria in the context of a community based health insurance scheme: QUality Improvement Cardiovascular care Kwara-I (QUICK-I).BMC public health · 2011Article
- Use of process measures to monitor the quality of clinical practice.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2007Article
- Quality of chronic disease care in general practice: the development and validation of a provider interview tool.BMC family practice · 2007Article
- Quality indicators for cardiovascular primary care.The Canadian journal of cardiology · 2007Article
- Control, compare and communicate: designing control charts to summarise efficiently data from multiple quality indicators.Quality & safety in health care · 2005Article
- Improvements in quality of clinical care in English general practice 1998-2003: longitudinal observational study.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2005Article
- Developing quality indicators for older adults: transfer from the USA to the UK is feasible.Quality & safety in health care · 2004Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate practical and methodological problems in assessing the quality of care of multiple conditions in general practice.
settingSixteen general practices from two socioeconomically diverse regions in the UK.
methodQuality of care was assessed in 100 randomly selected patient records in each practice using an established set of quality indicators covering 23 conditions commonly seen in primary care. Inter-rater reliability assessment was carried out for five of the conditions.
resultsConducting simultaneous quality assessment across multiple conditions is highly resource intensive. Poor data quality and the low prevalence of some items of care defined by the indicators are significant problems. Scores for individual indicators require very large samples for reliable assessment. Quality scores are more reliable when reported at a higher unit of analysis. This is particularly true for indicators and conditions with low prevalence where data may need to be aggregated to the level of groups of conditions or organisational providers. There is no single ideal way of aggregating quality scores.
conclusionThe study identified some of the practical and methodological difficulties in assessing quality of care across multiple conditions. For improved quality assessment, advances in information technology and improvements in data quality are required for more efficient and reliable data extraction from medical records, together with the development of methods for combining scores across indicators, conditions, and practices. However, electronic data extraction methods will still be based on the assumption that the care recorded reflects the care provided.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.