Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24024029›Full record

ArticleNursing research and practice2013

Improvement research priorities: USA survey and expert consensus.

Kathleen R Stevens, John Ovretveit

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nursing research and practice, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Kathleen R StevensAcademic Center for Evidence-Based Practice, School of Nursing, University of Texas Health Science Center San Antonio, San Antonio, TX 78229, USA ; Steering Council Member, Improvement Science Research Network, USA.
John Ovretveit

Funding

Institute for Integration of Medicine & Science: A Partnership to Improve HealthUL1TR001120 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HLTH SCIENCE CENTER · PI CLARK, ROBERT A, HARGREAVES, KENNETH M · 2013 to 2017
$16.5M
Institute for Integration of Medicine & Science: A Partnership to Improve HealthUL1TR000149 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HLTH SCIENCE CENTER · PI CLARK, ROBERT A · 2012 to 2013
$6.8M
A Practice-Based Research Network for Improvement ScienceRC2NR011946 · NINR · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HLTH SCIENCE CENTER · PI STEVENS, KATHLEEN R · 2009 to 2010
$3.2M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000149NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001120NINR NIH HHS RC2 NR011946
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to identify stakeholder views about national priorities for improvement science and build agreement for action in a national improvement and implementation research network in the USA. This was accomplished using three stages of identification and consensus. (1) Topics were identified through a multipronged environmental scan of the literature and initiatives. (2) Based on this scan, a survey was developed, and stakeholders (n = 2,777) were invited to rate the resulting 33-topic, 9-category list, via an online survey. Data from 560 respondents (20% response) were analyzed. (3) An expert panel used survey results to further refine the research priorities through a Rand Delphi process. Priorities identified were within four categories: care coordination and transitions, high-performing clinical systems and microsystems improvement approaches, implementation of evidence-based improvements and best practices, and culture of quality and safety. The priorities identified were adopted by the improvement science research network as the research agenda to guide strategy. The process and conclusions may be of value to quality improvement research funding agencies, governments, and research units seeking to concentrate their resources on improvement topics where research is capable of yielding timely and actionable answers as well as contributing to the knowledge base for improvement.

Identifiers

PMID24024029
PMCPMC3759273

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.