Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28824761›Full record

ArticleJournal of graduate medical education2017

Development of a Multi-Domain Assessment Tool for Quality Improvement Projects.

Glenn Rosenbluth, Natalie J Burman, Sumant R Ranji, Christy K Boscardin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of graduate medical education, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

4 authors.

Glenn Rosenbluth
Natalie J Burman
Sumant R Ranji
Christy K Boscardin

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundImproving the quality of health care and education has become a mandate at all levels within the medical profession. While several published quality improvement (QI) assessment tools exist, all have limitations in addressing the range of QI projects undertaken by learners in undergraduate medical education, graduate medical education, and continuing medical education.

objectiveWe developed and validated a tool to assess QI projects with learner engagement across the educational continuum.

methodsAfter reviewing existing tools, we interviewed local faculty who taught QI to understand how learners were engaged and what these faculty wanted in an ideal assessment tool. We then developed a list of competencies associated with QI, established items linked to these competencies, revised the items using an iterative process, and collected validity evidence for the tool.

resultsThe resulting Multi-Domain Assessment of Quality Improvement Projects (MAQIP) rating tool contains 9 items, with criteria that may be completely fulfilled, partially fulfilled, or not fulfilled. Interrater reliability was 0.77. Untrained local faculty were able to use the tool with minimal guidance.

conclusionsThe MAQIP is a 9-item, user-friendly tool that can be used to assess QI projects at various stages and to provide formative and summative feedback to learners at all levels.

Indexed as

Competency-Based EducationInternship and ResidencyQuality ImprovementDelivery of Health CareEducation, Medical, GraduateHumansInterviews as TopicReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID28824761
PMCPMC5559243

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.