ArticleSystematic reviews2013
Exploring why quality circles work in primary health care: a realist review protocol.
Article in Systematic reviews, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03510858 (Colorectal Cancer Testing in Swiss Primary Care), which is not on this map. Cited by 13 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.
Colorectal Cancer Testing in Swiss Primary Care: A Pilot Pragmatic Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial in Quality Circles of Physicians
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Experiences of quality cluster meetings in general practice - Findings from a national survey two years after initiation of quality clusters in Denmark.BMC primary care · 2025Article
- Article
- Finding common (research) ground between general practitioners and neuroscientists: the vital role of knowledge circulation in closing the evidence-to-practice gap.BMC family practice · 2021Article
- Physician Assessment and Feedback During Quality Circle to Reduce Low-Value Services in Outpatients: a Pre-Post Quality Improvement Study.Journal of general internal medicine · 2021Article
- Exploring how and why Care Groups work to improve infant feeding practices in low- and middle-income countries: a realist review protocol.Systematic reviews · 2020Article
- Implementation and Promotion of Quality Control Circle: A Starter for Quality Improvement in Chinese Hospitals.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2020Article
- Use of quality circles for primary care providers in 24 European countries: an online survey of European Society for Quality and Safety in family practice delegates.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2019Article
- Review
- Offering patients a choice for colorectal cancer screening: a quality improvement pilot study in a quality circle of primary care physicians.BMJ open quality · 2019Article
- Quality circles for quality improvement in primary health care: Their origins, spread, effectiveness and lacunae- A scoping review.PloS one · 2018Article
- Fostering needs assessment and access to medical rehabilitation for patients with chronic disease and endangered work ability: protocol of a multilevel evaluation on the effectiveness and efficacy of a CME intervention for general practitioners.Journal of occupational medicine and toxicology (London, England) · 2017Article
- Research protocol: a realist synthesis of contestability in community-based mental health markets.Systematic reviews · 2015Article
- The use of quality circles as a support tool in the taking over of practices by young general practitioners.Journal of family medicine and primary careArticle
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundQuality circles (QCs) are commonly used in primary health care in Europe to consider and improve standard practice over time. They represent a complex social intervention that occurs within the fast-changing system of primary health care. Numerous controlled trials, reviews, and studies have shown small but unpredictable positive effect sizes on behavior change. Although QCs seem to be effective, stakeholders have difficulty understanding how the results are achieved and in generalizing the results with confidence. They also lack understanding of the active components of QCs which result in changes in the behavior of health care professionals. This protocol for a realist synthesis will examine how configurations of components and the contextual features of QCs influence their performance. METHODS/
designStakeholder interviews and a scoping search revealed the processes of QCs and helped to describe their core components and underlying theories. After clarifying their historical and geographical distribution, a purposive and systematic search was developed to identify relevant papers to answer the research questions, which are: understanding why, how, and when QCs work, over what time frame, and in what circumstances. After selecting and abstracting appropriate data, configurations of contexts and mechanisms which influence the outcome of QCs within each study will be identified. Studies will be grouped by similar propositional statements in order to identify patterns and validation from stakeholders sought. Finally, theories will be explored in order to explain these patterns and to help stakeholders maintain and improve QC performance. DISCUSSION: Analyzing context-mechanism-outcome (CMO) patterns will reveal how QCs work and how contextual factors interact to influence their outcome. The aim is to investigate unique configurations that enable them to improve the performance of health care professionals. Using a standardized reporting system, this realist review will allow the research questions to be answered to the satisfaction of key stakeholders and enable on-going critical examination and dissemination of the findings. STUDY REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration number: CRD42013004826.
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.