ArticleHealth services research2009
Evaluation of the AHRQ patient safety initiative: framework and approach.
Article in Health services research, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Website Supporting Sensitive Religious and Cultural Advance Care Planning (ACPTalk): Formative and Summative Evaluation.JMIR research protocols · 2018Article
- Article
- Adopting information technology to drive improvements in patient safety: lessons from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality health information technology grantees.Health services research · 2009Article
- Training a patient safety work force: the patient safety improvement corps.Health services research · 2009Article
- Assessment of contributions to patient safety knowledge by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality-funded patient safety projects.Health services research · 2009Article
- Safety outcomes in the United States: trends and challenges in measurement.Health services research · 2009Article
- Evaluation of the AHRQ patient safety initiative: synthesis of findings.Health services research · 2009Article
- The growth of partnerships to support patient safety practice adoption.Health services research · 2009Article
- Experiences of Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality-funded projects that implemented practices for safer patient care.Health services research · 2009Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveDescribe the evaluation performed of the patient safety initiative operated by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). AHRQ PATIENT SAFETY INITIATIVE When patient safety became a national priority in 2000, Congress charged and funded AHRQ to improve health care safety. Over the next 6 years, AHRQ funded more than 300 research projects and other activities, addressing diverse patient safety issues and practices. THE PATIENT SAFETY EVALUATION: AHRQ contracted with RAND in 2002 to perform a 4-year evaluation of the initiative, which was completed in 2006. This formative evaluation used the CIPP program evaluation model, which emphasizes multiple stakeholders' interests (e.g., patients, providers, funded researchers). We monitored the progress of the patient safety initiative and provided AHRQ annual feedback that assessed each year's activities, identifying issues and offering suggestions for actions by AHRQ. Given the size and complexity of the initiative, the evaluation needed to examine key individual components and synthesize results across them, and it also had to be responsive to changes in the initiative over time. We used a conceptual framework to bring together the disparate pieces to synthesize overall findings. The remaining articles in this issue describe selected results from this evaluation.
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.