Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24587702›Full record

ReviewClinics in colon and rectal surgery2014

The future of quality measurement in the United States.

Fia Yi

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinics in colon and rectal surgery, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

1 author.

Fia YiDivision of Colorectal Surgery, Mike O'Callaghan Federal Medical Center, University of Nevada School of Medicine, Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The need to practice cost efficient medicine and provide it in the safest way possible is paving the way for quality improvement (QI) programs to take off. American College of Surgeons National Surgical QI Project and Surgical Care and Outcomes Assessment Program are some of the leading examples and have provided useful data to evaluate our systems and decrease morbidity and mortality. With proven outcomes driving morbidity and mortality rates down, we have to wonder how to refine these measures to make them more relevant to specialty surgeries such as colorectal. On the contrary, participation in programs like these has placed extended requirements on hospitals and physicians. In addition, some of the quality measures may be inaccurately identifying low and high performing hospitals and individuals because of inherent flaws in the database. This could potentially be in conflict with the mission of these programs. What will be presented are some alternatives and different directions QI is moving toward.

Indexed as

ACS NSQIPcolorectal surgeryprocess measuresquality improvement

Identifiers

PMID24587702
PMCPMC3926920

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.