SynthesisBMC health services research2016
The impact of redesigning care processes on quality of care: a systematic review.
Synthesis in BMC health services research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Service redesign interventions to reduce waiting time for paediatric rehabilitation and therapy services: A systematic review of the literature.Health & social care in the community · 2022Pooled it
- Innovations Implemented to Improve Access to Outpatient Rehabilitation Services for Persons Presenting Physical Disabilities: Results of an Environmental Scan in Québec, Canada.Health services insights · 2026Article
- The Impact of Pandemic-Driven Care Redesign on Hospital Efficiency.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2024Review
- Exploring quality improvement for diabetes care in First Nations communities in Canada: a multiple case study.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Appropriate CT cervical spine utilisation in the emergency department.BMJ open quality · 2020Article
- Quality improvement of intravenous to oral medication conversion using Lean Six Sigma methodologies.BMJ open quality · 2020Article
- How to improve healthcare improvement-an essay by Mary Dixon-Woods.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2019Article
- Improving comprehensive care for patients with diabetes.BMJ open quality · 2018Article
- Advances in medical education and practice: role of massive open online courses.Advances in medical education and practice · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis literature review evaluates the current state of knowledge about the impact of process redesign on the quality of healthcare.
methodsPubmed, CINAHL, Web of Science and Business Premier Source were searched for relevant studies published in the last ten years [2004-2014]. To be included, studies had to be original research, published in English with a before-and-after study design, and be focused on changes in healthcare processes and quality of care. Studies that met the inclusion criteria were independently assessed for excellence in reporting by three reviewers using the SQUIRE checklist. Data was extracted using a framework developed for this review.
resultsReporting adequacy varied across the studies. Process redesign interventions were diverse, and none of the studies described their effects on all dimensions of quality defined by the Institute of Medicine.
conclusionsThe results of this systematic literature review suggests that process redesign interventions have positive effects on certain aspects of quality. However, the full impact cannot be determined on the basis of the literature. A wide range of outcome measures were used, and research methods were limited. This review demonstrates the need for further investigation of the impact of redesign interventions on the quality of healthcare.
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.