ArticleIsrael journal of health policy research2012
Monitoring quality in Israeli primary care: The primary care physicians' perspective.
Article in Israel journal of health policy research, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Primary care physicians' perceptions of Israel's national program for quality indicators in community healthcare- 2010 and 2020.Israel journal of health policy research · 2025Article
- Article
- Primary Care Physicians' Perceptions on Nurses' Shared Responsibility for Quality of Patient Care: A Survey.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Strong primary care services, an important feature of primary health care: What can Nigeria learn from Israel?Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
- National initiatives to promote quality of care and patient safety: achievements to date and challenges ahead.Israel journal of health policy research · 2020Review
- The changing roles of community nurses: the case of health plan nurses in Israel.Israel journal of health policy research · 2017Article
- Physician-facilitated designation of proxy decision-makers: family physician perceptions.Israel journal of health policy research · 2016Article
- How Do Primary Care Physicians Perceive the Role of Nurses in Quality Measurement and Improvement? The Israeli Story.Frontiers in public health · 2016Article
- Participation of National Medical Associations in quality improvement activities - International comparison and the Israeli case.Israel journal of health policy research · 2014Article
- Recent physician strike in Israel: a health system under stress?Israel journal of health policy research · 2013Article
- Improving health outcomes: innovation, coverage, quality and adherence.Israel journal of health policy research · 2012Article
- Monitoring quality in Israeli primary care: The primary care physicians' perspective.Israel journal of health policy research · 2012Article
- Physicians' views of performance reports: grading the graders.Israel journal of health policy research · 2012Article
- Socioeconomic Disparity Trends in Cancer Screening Among Women After Introduction of National Quality Indicators.Annals of family medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSince 2000, Israel has had a national program for ongoing monitoring of the quality of the primary care services provided by the country's four competing non-profit health plans. Previous research has demonstrated that quality of care has improved substantially since the program's inception and that the program enjoys wide support among health plan managers. However, prior to this study there were anecdotal and journalistic reports of opposition to the program among primary care physicians engaged in direct service delivery; these raised serious questions about the extent of support among physicians nationally. GOALS: To assess how Israeli primary care physicians experience and rate health plan efforts to track and improve the quality of care.
methodThe study population consisted of primary care physicians employed by the health plans who have responsibility for the quality of care of a panel of adult patients. The study team randomly sampled 250 primary-care physicians from each of the four health plans. Of the 1,000 physicians sampled, 884 met the study criteria. Every physician could choose whether to participate in the survey by mail, e-mail, or telephone. The anonymous questionnaire was completed by 605 physicians - 69% of those eligible. The data were weighted to reflect differences in sampling and response rates across health plans. MAIN
findingsThe vast majority of respondents (87%) felt that the monitoring of quality was important and two-thirds (66%) felt that the feedback and subsequent remedial interventions improved medical care to a great extent. Almost three-quarters (71%) supported continuation of the program in an unqualified manner. The physicians with the most positive attitudes to the program were over age 44, independent contract physicians, and either board-certified in internal medicine or without any board-certification (i.e., residents or general practitioners). At the same time, support for the program was widespread even among physicians who are young, board-certified in family medicine, and salaried.Many physicians also reported that various problems had emerged to a great or very great extent: a heavier workload (65%), over-competitiveness (60%), excessive managerial pressure (48%), and distraction from other clinical issues (35%). In addition, there was some criticism of the quality of the measures themselves. Respondents also identified approaches to addressing these problems.
conclusionsThe findings provide perspective on the anecdotal reports of physician opposition to the monitoring program; they may well accurately reflect the views of the small number of physicians directly involved, but they do not reflect the views of primary care physicians as a whole, who are generally quite supportive of the program. At the same time, the study confirms the existence of several perceived problems. Some of these problems, such as excess managerial pressure, can probably best be addressed by the health plans themselves; while others, such as the need to refine the quality indicators, are probably best addressed at the national level. Cooperation between primary care physicians and health plan managers, which has been an essential component of the program's success thus far, can also play an important role in addressing the problems identified.
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.