ReviewVisceral medicine2017
Dimensions of Quality and Their Increasing Relevance for Visceral Medicine in Germany.
Review in Visceral medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A qualitative approach to understanding quality symptom management in routine oncology outpatient care: phase 1 of the symptom pathways project.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Article
- Surveillance of surgical site infections: methodical comparison of the IQTIG and KISS strategies.GMS hygiene and infection control · 2021Article
- Volume and Quality in Visceral Medicine.Visceral medicine · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background'Quality in medicine' is a term used in a broad sense. In this work the definition and dimensions of quality in medicine and the implementation of a measurement and reporting system in Germany are discussed. Existing applications are described and possible future effects are pointed out.
methodsThe ongoing process of implementing a quality reporting system into the German healthcare system is studied by publicly available legal texts, published reactions of stakeholders and publications of G-BA and IQTIG. Definitions of quality, dimensions of quality and quality measurement in medicine are studied by using textbooks as well as the world wide web and PubMed search.
resultsDonabedian's 'dimensions of quality' are fundamental in dealing with quality in medicine. Existing measurement and reporting systems have immanent strengths and weaknesses, as the definition of quality is affected by one's point of view. The legislator will have to decide which 'dimension of quality' is mandatory and how to measure it.
conclusionQuality has become a control instrument with unforeseeable consequences. A clear definition of the used quality concept is as essential as the use of feasible measurement and reporting systems. The use of routine data could be an interesting option.
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.