SynthesisFamily practice2018
Quality indicators for care of osteoarthritis in primary care settings: a systematic literature review.
Synthesis in Family practice, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Routine-data-compatible quality indicators for the ambulatory care of osteoarthritis of the knee and hip: A systematic review.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2025Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Benchmarking Performance in Pancreatic Surgery: a Systematic Review of Published Quality Metrics.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2021Pooled it
- Feasibility and Reliability of the Osteoarthritis Quality Indicator Questionnaire for Assessing Osteoarthritis Care in Bilingual General Practices in South Tyrol/Alto Adige, Italy.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
- Successes and challenges towards improving quality of primary health care services: a scoping review.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Quality indicators for osteoarthritis pain management in the primary care setting.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2023Article
- Review
- Evaluation of a collaborative ambulatory orthopedic care program for patients with hip and knee osteoarthritis: a comparative observational cohort study.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2022Observational
- Cost-DALY comparison of hip replacement care in 12 Belgian hospitals.BMJ open quality · 2021Article
- Quality indicators for ambulatory care for older adults with diabetes and comorbid conditions: A Delphi study.PloS one · 2018Article
- Collaborative Ambulatory Orthopaedic Care in Patients with Hip and Knee Osteoarthritis: A Retrospective Comparative Cohort Study on Health Utilisation and Economic Outcomes.International journal of integrated careArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Despite the high prevalence of osteoarthritis and the prominence of primary care in managing this condition, there is no systematic summary of quality indicators applicable for osteoarthritis care in primary care settings. Objectives: This systematic review aimed to identify evidence-based quality indicators for monitoring, evaluating and improving the quality of care for adults with osteoarthritis in primary care settings. Methods: Ovid MEDLINE and Ovid EMBASE databases and grey literature, including relevant organizational websites, were searched from 2000 to 2015. Two reviewers independently selected studies if (i) the study methodology combined a systematic literature search with assessment of quality indicators by an expert panel and (ii) quality indicators were applicable to assessment of care for adults with osteoarthritis in primary care settings. Included studies were appraised using the Appraisal of Indicators through Research and Evaluation (AIRE) instrument. A narrative synthesis was used to combine the indicators within themes. Applicable quality indicators were categorized according to Donabedian's 'structure-process-outcome' framework. Results: The search revealed 4526 studies, of which 32 studies were reviewed in detail and 4 studies met the inclusion criteria. According to the AIRE domains, all studies were clear on purpose and stakeholder involvement, while formal endorsement and use of indicators in practice were scarcely described. A total of 20 quality indicators were identified from the included studies, many of which overlapped conceptually or in content. Conclusions: The process of developing quality indicators was methodologically suboptimal in most cases. There is a need to develop specific process, structure and outcome measures for adults with osteoarthritis using appropriate methodology.
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.