ArticleAcademic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges2017
Five Tactics to Quickly Build Quality Improvement and Patient Safety Capacity at Academic Health Centers.
Article in Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The triple helix of clinical, research, and education missions in academic health centers: A qualitative study of diverse stakeholder perspectives.Learning health systems · 2021Article
- Increasing Faculty Participation and Mentorship in Quality Improvement with an Experiential Four-Hour Workshop.Journal of medical education and curricular developmentArticle
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this issue, Coleman and colleagues propose an ambitious strategic action framework for academic health center (AHC) department chairs seeking to expand faculty expertise in quality improvement and patient safety (QI/PS). Noting the advent of value-based payment models and that AHCs lag behind some community hospitals in QI/PS, Coleman and colleagues call for deliberate, proactive faculty development and recognition measures to build QI/PS capacity at AHCs. In this Invited Commentary, the author addresses the five challenges to strengthening QI/PS capacity identified by Coleman and colleagues: (1) the mentorship gap: the paucity of expert senior faculty who can mentor junior colleagues in QI/PS; (2) data and analytic bottlenecks: information systems and analytic requests to support QI/PS projects often get pushed to the back of long queues of prioritized queries from other departments, effectively halting QI/PS projects; (3) misalignment between existing reimbursement mechanisms and QI/PS: current fee-for-service and prospective payment mechanisms drive high utilization of costly interventions and can financially penalize organizations that keep patients well and avoid interventions; (4) limited recognition for QI/PS achievement in academic advancement decisions; and (5) pressure to invent and deploy alternative business models that reward value and results rather than the volume and pricing of services, to better align payer, provider, and patient incentives around high-value care. The author outlines practical short-term measures to mitigate the first four challenges and a more expansive vision for AHCs to transform their business models and regain a leadership position in QI/PS to address the fifth challenge.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27191839What 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.