ArticleInternational journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care2018
Practical recommendations for the evaluation of improvement initiatives.
Article in International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Integrating theory and practice: the core components guide for rigorous quality improvement design.Frontiers in health services · 2026Article
- Quality and reporting of large-scale improvement programmes: a review of maternity initiatives in the English NHS, 2010-2023.BMJ quality & safety · 2024Review
- Measuring psychological safety and local learning to enable high reliability organisational change.BMJ open quality · 2022Article
- A mapping and synthesis of tools for stakeholder and community engagement in quality improvement initiatives for reproductive, maternal, newborn, child and adolescent health.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2021Review
- Feasibility of an implementation intervention to increase attendance at diabetic retinopathy screening: protocol for a cluster randomised pilot trial.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2020Article
- Partnering with patients in quality improvement: towards renewed practices for healthcare organization managers?BMC health services research · 2019Article
- Why is reporting quality improvement so hard? A qualitative study in perioperative care.BMJ open · 2019Article
- Developing a framework of quality indicators for healthcare business cases: a qualitative document analysis consolidating insight from expert guidance and current practice.BMC health services research · 2019Article
- Successful Healthcare Improvements From Translating Evidence in complex systems (SHIFT-Evidence): simple rules to guide practice and research.International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
- Reinstatement · 2018-02-16Error by Journal/Publisher · Retract and Replace · Temporary Removal · Removed · · article reinstated unknown date:
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A lack of clear guidance for funders, evaluators and improvers on what to include in evaluation proposals can lead to evaluation designs that do not answer the questions stakeholders want to know. These evaluation designs may not match the iterative nature of improvement and may be imposed onto an initiative in a way that is impractical from the perspective of improvers and the communities with whom they work. Consequently, the results of evaluations are often controversial, and attribution remains poorly understood. Improvement initiatives are iterative, adaptive and context-specific. Evaluation approaches and designs must align with these features, specifically in their ability to consider complexity, to evolve as the initiative adapts over time and to understand the interaction with local context. Improvement initiatives often identify broadly defined change concepts and provide tools for care teams to tailor these in more detail to local conditions. Correspondingly, recommendations for evaluation are best provided as broad guidance, to be tailored to the specifics of the initiative. In this paper, we provide practical guidance and recommendations that funders and evaluators can use when developing an evaluation plan for improvement initiatives that seeks to: identify the questions stakeholders want to address; develop the initial program theory of the initiative; identify high-priority areas to measure progress over time; describe the context the initiative will be applied within; and identify experimental or observational designs that will address attribution.
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.