ReviewSAGE open medicine2015
Benchmarking facilities providing care: An international overview of initiatives.
Review in SAGE open medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05901155 (Impact of medAL-mentor, a Real-time Mentoring and Benchmarking Tool, on Antibiotic Prescription Among Children in Primary Health Care Facilities in Tanzania), which is not on this map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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.
Impact of medAL-mentor, a Real-time Mentoring and Benchmarking Tool, on Antibiotic Prescription Among Children in Primary Health Care Facilities in Tanzania
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The contribution of benchmarking to quality improvement in healthcare. A systematic literature review.BMC health services research · 2022Pooled it
- Embarking on improvement cycles - the next steps in surgical benchmarking.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2025Article
- Prototype master protocol for benchmarking of real-world follow-up data in glaucoma.Acta ophthalmologica · 2025Article
- A survey of the treatment and management of ingrown toenails by UK podiatrists: A cross-sectional survey.Journal of foot and ankle research · 2024Article
- Observational
- Collection and use of EQ-5D for follow-up, decision-making, and quality improvement in health care - the case of the Swedish National Quality Registries.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2020Article
- Validation of an algorithm based on administrative data to detect new onset of atrial fibrillation after cardiac surgery.BMC medical research methodology · 2020Article
- Benchmarking of survival outcomes following haematopoietic stem cell transplantation: A review of existing processes and the introduction of an international system from the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT) and the Joint Accreditation Committee of ISCT and EBMT (JACIE).Bone marrow transplantation · 2020Review
- One size fits none - a qualitative study investigating nine national quality registries' conditions for use in quality improvement, research and interaction with patients.BMC health services research · 2018Article
- Development of a benchmark tool for cancer centers; results from a pilot exercise.BMC health services research · 2018Article
- A country wide adaptation of the European Society of Thoracic Surgeons lung cancer core database: the Hungarian model.Journal of thoracic disease · 2018Article
- Accuracy and generalizability of using automated methods for identifying adverse events from electronic health record data: a validation study protocol.BMC health services research · 2017Article
- "Frontiers in pediatrics · 2016Article
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
We performed a literature review of existing benchmarking projects of health facilities to explore (1) the rationales for those projects, (2) the motivation for health facilities to participate, (3) the indicators used and (4) the success and threat factors linked to those projects. We studied both peer-reviewed and grey literature. We examined 23 benchmarking projects of different medical specialities. The majority of projects used a mix of structure, process and outcome indicators. For some projects, participants had a direct or indirect financial incentive to participate (such as reimbursement by Medicaid/Medicare or litigation costs related to quality of care). A positive impact was reported for most projects, mainly in terms of improvement of practice and adoption of guidelines and, to a lesser extent, improvement in communication. Only 1 project reported positive impact in terms of clinical outcomes. Success factors and threats are linked to both the benchmarking process (such as organisation of meetings, link with existing projects) and indicators used (such as adjustment for diagnostic-related groups). The results of this review will help coordinators of a benchmarking project to set it up successfully.
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.