Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15762902›Full record

ArticleHealth services research2005

From adversary to partner: have quality improvement organizations made the transition?

Elizabeth H Bradley, Melissa D A Carlson, William T Gallo, Jeanne Scinto, Miriam K Campbell, Harlan M Krumholz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health services research, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Are quality improvement messages registering?Health services research · 2005
    Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Elizabeth H BradleyDepartment of Epidemiology and Public Health, Yale School of Medicine, 60 College Street, New Haven, CT 06520-8034, USA.
Melissa D A Carlson
William T Gallo
Jeanne Scinto
Miriam K Campbell
Harlan M Krumholz

Funding

Yale Study Support Suite (YES3): Dashboard and Web Portal Software Supporting Research Workflow through integrated, customizable REDCap External ModulesP30AG021342 · NIA · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI Albert C Shaw · 2002 to 2026
$37.9M
NIA NIH HHS P30 AG021342NIA NIH HHS P30AG21342
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo describe the perceived impact of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Quality Improvement Organizations (QIOs) on quality of care for patients hospitalized with acute myocardial infarction, in the context of new efforts to work more collaboratively with hospitals in the pursuit of quality improvement. DATA SOURCE: Primary data collected from a national random sample of 105 hospital quality management directors interviewed between January and July 2002. STUDY

designWe interviewed quality management directors concerning their interactions with the QIO interventions, the helpfulness of QIO interventions and the degree to which they helped or hindered their hospital quality efforts, and their recommendations for improving QIO effectiveness. PRINCIPLE

findingsMore than 90% of hospitals reported that their QIO had initiated specific interventions, the most common being the provision of educational materials, benchmark data, and hospital performance data. Many respondents (60%) rated most QIO interventions as helpful or very helpful, although only one-quarter of respondents believed quality of care would have been worse without the QIO interventions. To increase QIO efficacy, respondents recommended that QIOs appeal more directly to senior administration, target physicians (not just hospital employees), and enhance the perceived validity and timeliness of data used in quality indicators.

conclusionsOur study demonstrates that the QIOs have overcome, to some degree, the previously adversarial and punitive roles of Peer Review Organizations with hospitals. The generally positive view among most hospital quality improvement directors concerning the QIO interventions suggests that QIOs are potentially poised to take a leading role in promoting quality of care. However, the full potential of QIOs will likely not be realized until QIOs are able to engender greater engagement from senior hospital administration and physicians.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelProfessional Review OrganizationsBenchmarkingCenters for Medicare and Medicaid Services, U.S.Cross-Sectional StudiesHealth PromotionHospital AdministratorsHospitalsHumansMyocardial InfarctionOrganizational InnovationPhysician ExecutivesQuality Indicators, Health CareTotal Quality ManagementUnited States

Identifiers

PMID15762902
PMCPMC1361151

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.