Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28393064›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2017

Exploring Systems That Support Good Clinical Care in Indigenous Primary Health-care Services: A Retrospective Analysis of Longitudinal Systems Assessment Tool Data from High-Improving Services.

Cindy Woods, Karen Carlisle, Sarah Larkins, Sandra Claire Thompson, Komla Tsey, Veronica Matthews, Ross Bailie

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Addressing Social and Cultural Determinants of Health for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander People in Chronic Disease Programs: A Scoping Review.Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Cindy WoodsSchool of Health, University of New England , Armidale, NSW , Australia.
Karen CarlisleCollege of Medicine and Dentistry, James Cook University, Townsville, QLD, Australia; Anton Breinl Research Centre for Health Systems Strengthening, James Cook University, Townsville, QLD, Australia; Australian Institute of Tropical Health and Medicine, James Cook University, Townsville, QLD, Australia.
Sarah LarkinsCollege of Medicine and Dentistry, James Cook University, Townsville, QLD, Australia; Anton Breinl Research Centre for Health Systems Strengthening, James Cook University, Townsville, QLD, Australia; Australian Institute of Tropical Health and Medicine, James Cook University, Townsville, QLD, Australia.
Sandra Claire ThompsonWestern Australian Centre for Rural Health, University of Western Australia , Geraldton, WA , Australia.
Komla TseyAnton Breinl Research Centre for Health Systems Strengthening, James Cook University, Townsville, QLD, Australia; Cairns Institute and College of Art, Society and Education, James Cook University, Cairns, QLD, Australia.
Veronica MatthewsMenzies School of Health Research , Brisbane, QLD , Australia.
Ross BailieUniversity Centre for Rural Health , Lismore, NSW , Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundContinuous Quality Improvement is a process for raising the quality of primary health care (PHC) across Indigenous PHC services. In addition to clinical auditing using plan, do, study, and act cycles, engaging staff in a process of reflecting on systems to support quality care is vital. The One21seventy Systems Assessment Tool (SAT) supports staff to assess systems performance in terms of five key components. This study examines quantitative and qualitative SAT data from five high-improving Indigenous PHC services in northern Australia to understand the systems used to support quality care.

methodsHigh-improving services selected for the study were determined by calculating quality of care indices for Indigenous health services participating in the Audit and Best Practice in Chronic Disease National Research Partnership. Services that reported continuing high improvement in quality of care delivered across two or more audit tools in three or more audits were selected for the study. Precollected SAT data (from annual team SAT meetings) are presented longitudinally using radar plots for quantitative scores for each component, and content analysis is used to describe strengths and weaknesses of performance in each systems' component.

resultsHigh-improving services were able to demonstrate strong processes for assessing system performance and consistent improvement in systems to support quality care across components. Key strengths in the quality support systems included adequate and orientated workforce, appropriate health system supports, and engagement with other organizations and community, while the weaknesses included lack of service infrastructure, recruitment, retention, and support for staff and additional costs. Qualitative data revealed clear voices from health service staff expressing concerns with performance, and subsequent SAT data provided evidence of changes made to address concerns.

conclusionLearning from the processes and strengths of high-improving services may be useful as we work with services striving to improve the quality of care provided in other areas.

Indexed as

Indigenous healthprimary health careprimary health servicesquality improvementsystems improvement

Identifiers

PMID28393064
PMCPMC5364947

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.