ArticleJournal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association2017
Identifying a quality improvement project.
Article in Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Five principles to prioritise in small-scale surgical quality improvement: a qualitative study of the views of surgical improvement leaders.BMJ open quality · 2025Article
- Circulating mannose-binding lectin in diabetic patients and risk of vascular complications: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of diabetes and metabolic disorders · 2024Article
- Changing safety culture.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2021Article
- A practical guide to publishing a quality improvement paper.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2021Article
- Measurement for quality improvement: using data to drive change.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2020Review
- The business case for quality improvement.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2020Article
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
An important step on the roadmap to a successful quality improvement (QI) project is careful selection of topics and aims to be addressed by QI projects. Using information from a variety of data monitoring systems as well as individual events and experiences, leaders of neonatal units and QI teams should first identify quality and safety gaps in their unit. They should then use an explicit, formal process for selecting the best projects to which their limited time and resources should be allocated. Priority should be given to projects that address a quality gap of high magnitude and impact, have a high likelihood of success, have a champion, fit with the unit's state of readiness for change, have organizational support and align with organizational priorities. The scope of the project should also match the experience and expertise of the QI team.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28837135What 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.