ArticleNPJ primary care respiratory medicine2015
Impact of a patient-specific co-designed COPD care scorecard on COPD care quality: a quasi-experimental study.
Article in NPJ primary care respiratory medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 4 of them syntheses 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Supporting referral to pulmonary rehabilitation from primary care: A systematic evaluation of interventions using the ERIC taxonomy.NPJ primary care respiratory medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Measurement and outcomes of co-production in health and social care: a systematic review of empirical studies.BMJ open · 2023Pooled it
- A Systematic Review of the Effectiveness of Interventions to Promote Referral; Adherence; and Uptake of Pulmonary Rehabilitation for Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2023Pooled it
- Interventions to increase referral and uptake to pulmonary rehabilitation in people with COPD: a systematic review.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary diseasePooled it
- A qualitative assessment of the pulmonary rehabilitation decision-making needs of patients living with COPD.NPJ primary care respiratory medicine · 2022Article
- The Need for Expanding Pulmonary Rehabilitation Services.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe evidence that sharing mass care quality data with health service users improves care is weak.
aimsWe hypothesised that providing patients with individualised care quality data would drive improvements to the care received by those patients.
methodsTogether with patients who had chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), we co-designed a quality score card mapping indicators derived from National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) quality standards against matched data taken from their general practice clinical records. All 640 COPD patients from 10 practices had improvements in these indicators before and 3 months after the intervention compared with 595 COPD patients in 10 control practices.
resultsSignificant improvements in referral to pulmonary rehabilitation (P=0.03) and confirmation of diagnosis with spirometry (P=0.001) were seen in the intervention compared with the control practice population (P<0.001). Increases in the provision of self-management plans were seen in both the groups. No improvement was seen in other indicators.
conclusionsAlthough the study is not able to prove a direct cause and effect, there is sufficient evidence presented to warrant the larger-scale evaluation of co-designed, personalised, quality score cards for COPD patients used as a tool to enhance care quality.
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.