ArticlePloS one2013
Evaluating the quality of colorectal cancer care across the interface of healthcare sectors.
Article in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- What makes a good quality indicator set? A systematic review of criteria.International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2021Pooled it
- [Cross-sectoral care trajectories of patients with colorectal cancer in Saxony-Anhalt].Gesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany)) · 2024Article
- Fragmentation of care and colorectal cancer survival in South Korea: comparisons according to treatment at multiple hospitals.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2022Article
- Evidence-based indicators for the measurement of quality of primary care using health insurance claims data in Switzerland: update of the SQUIPRICA working group.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Current Trends in the Quality Assessment of Colorectal Cancer Practice and Treatment in South Korea during 2012-2017.Cancer research and treatment · 2021Article
- Continuity of Care in Swiss Cancer Patients Using Claims Data.Patient preference and adherence · 2020Article
- Quality management: where is the evidence? Developing an indicator-based approach in Kenya.International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2017Article
- Collaboration and communication in colorectal cancer care: a qualitative study of the challenges experienced by patients and health care professionals.Family practice · 2015Article
- Development of quality indicators and data assessment strategies for the prevention of central venous catheter-related bloodstream infections (CRBSI).BMC infectious diseases · 2015Article
- The patients' active role in managing a personal electronic health record: a qualitative analysis.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2015Article
- Breast Implant-associated Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma: Updated Results from a Structured Expert Consultation Process.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2015Article
- Bridging the gap between patient needs and quality indicators: a qualitative study with chronic heart failure patients.Patient preference and adherence · 2015Article
- Assessment of quality-of-care indicators for colorectal cancer surgery at a single centre in a developing country.Canadian journal of surgery. Journal canadien de chirurgieArticle
- Integrated care pathway for rectal cancer treatment: cross-sectional post-implementation study using a logic model framework.Sao Paulo medical journal = Revista paulista de medicinaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundColorectal cancer (CRC) has a high prevalence in western countries. Diagnosis and treatment of CRC is complex and requires multidisciplinary collaboration across the interface of health care sectors. In Germany, a new nationwide established program aims to provide quality information of healthcare delivery across different sectors. Within this context, this study describes the development of a set of quality indicators charting the whole pathway of CRC-care including data specifications that are necessary to operationalize these indicators before practice testing.
methodsIndicators were developed following a systematic 10 step modified 'RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method' which involved a multidisciplinary panel of thirteen participants. For each indicator in the final set, data specifications relating to sources of quality information, data collection procedures, analysis and feedback were described.
resultsThe final indicator set included 52 indicators covering diagnostic procedures (11 indicators), therapeutic management (28 indicators) and follow-up (6 indicators). In addition, 7 indicators represented patient perspectives. Primary surgical tumor resection and pre-operative radiation (rectum carcinoma only) were perceived as most useful tracer procedures initiating quality data collection. To assess the quality of CRC care across sectors, various data sources were identified: medical records, administrative inpatient and outpatient data, sickness-funds billing code systems and patient survey.
conclusionIn Germany, a set of 52 quality indicators, covering necessary aspects across the interfaces and pathways relevant to CRC-care has been developed. Combining different sectors and sources of health care in quality assessment is an innovative and challenging approach but reflects better the reality of the patient pathway and experience of CRC-care.
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.