Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25670664›Full record

ArticleQualitative health research2016

Health Care User Perspectives on Constructing, Contextualizing, and Co-Producing "Quality of Care".

Abigail Baim-Lance, Daniel Tietz, Madeleine Schlefer, Bruce Agins

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Qualitative health research, 2016. 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. Review
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

4 authors.

Abigail Baim-LanceUniversity College London, London, United Kingdom a.baim-lance@ucl.ac.uk.
Daniel TietzNew York State Department of Health, Albany, NY, USA.
Madeleine SchleferNew York State Department of Health, New York City, NY, USA.
Bruce AginsNew York State Department of Health, New York City, NY, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Most of the research on health care user "quality of care" perspectives seeks discrete and measurable indicators to advance quality improvement (QI) goals. This lacks sufficiently grounded query about the meaning of "quality of care" for health users, and how context influences their ideas and experiences. We studied this between 2010 and 2011, repeatedly interviewing and shadowing 45 individuals in three of New York's hospital-based outpatient HIV care settings during routine visits. We found participants using common terminology, but across the cohort meaning varied and employed personal narratives. Participants conveyed the impact of historic and current experiences of stigma and discrimination on limiting access to care, and showed its destabilizing effects on quality constructs. Participants also felt they contributed to their health care settings' delivery of quality care. From our findings, we discuss the applicability and implications of "co-production" to conceptualize health care as jointly delivered by typical "givers" and "receivers" of care.

Indexed as

Professional-Patient RelationsQuality of Health CareAdultFemaleHIV InfectionsHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedNew YorkOutpatient Clinics, HospitalPatient SatisfactionSafetySocial Stigmacontextco-productionHIV/AIDSnarrativesquality improvementquality of care

Identifiers

PMID25670664
PMCPMC4702281

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.