How could the quality and outcomes framework (QOF) do more to tackle health inequalities?

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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Analysis of the application of policy instruments for close-knit county medical communities based on Hood's classification.Frontiers in public health · 2025
   Article
2. Opting out of the Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) and impact on practices' performance.Public health in practice (Oxford, England) · 2024
   Article
3. Cardiovascular-related conditions and risk factors in primary care for deprived communities before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: an observational study in Northern England.BMJ open · 2022
   Observational
4. Evaluating the Effectiveness of a Local Primary Care Incentive Scheme: A Difference-in-Differences Study.Medical care research and review : MCRR · 2022
   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

1 author.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

Indexed as