ArticleBMJ open2018
What attributions do Australian high-performing general practices make for their success? Applying the clinical microsystems framework: a qualitative study.
Article in BMJ open, 2018. 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.
- Quality improvement work in general practice; a Norwegian focus group study.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2024Article
- Implementing primary care diabetes prevention for women with previous gestational diabetes: a mixed-methods study.Family practice · 2022Article
- Findings and lessons learnt implementing a cardiovascular disease quality improvement program in Australian primary care: a mixed method evaluation.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Article
- An evaluation of the clinical microsystems approach in general practice quality improvement.Primary health care research & development · 2020Article
- Relationship between general practice capitation funding and the quality of primary care in England: a cross-sectional, 3-year study.BMJ open · 2019Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo identify the success attributions of high-performing Australian general practices and the enablers and barriers they envisage for practices wishing to emulate them.
designQualitative study using semi-structured interviews and content analysis of the data. Responses were recorded, transcribed verbatim and coded according to success characteristics of high-performing clinical microsystems.
settingPrimary healthcare with the participating general practices representing all Australian states and territories, and representing metropolitan and rural locations.
participantsTwenty-two general practices identified as high performing via a number of success criteria. The 52 participants were 19 general practitioners, 18 practice managers and 15 practice nurses.
resultsParticipants most frequently attributed success to the interdependence of the team members, patient-focused care and leadership of the practice. They most often signalled practice leadership, team interdependence and staff focus as enablers that other organisations would need to emulate their success. They most frequently identified barriers that might be encountered in the form of potential deficits or limitations in practice leadership, staff focus and mesosystem support.
conclusionsPractice leaders need to empower their teams to take action through providing inclusive leadership that facilitates team interdependence. Mesosystem support for quality improvement in general practice should focus on enabling this leadership and team building, thereby ensuring improvement efforts are converted into effective healthcare provision.
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.