Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29749286›Full record

ArticleJournal of the Royal Society of Medicine2018

Identifying positive deviants in healthcare quality and safety: a mixed methods study.

Jane K O'Hara, Katja Grasic, Nils Gutacker, Andrew Street, Robbie Foy, Carl Thompson, John Wright, Rebecca Lawton

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. A giant step for science: JRSM welcomes preprints in medical science.Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2018
    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

8 authors.

Jane K O'Hara1 Leeds Institute of Medical Education, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9NL, UK.
Katja Grasic3 Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York YO10 5DD, UK.
Nils Gutacker3 Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York YO10 5DD, UK.
Andrew Street4 Department of Health Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, London WC2A 2AE, UK.
Robbie Foy5 Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9NL, UK.
Carl Thompson6 School of Healthcare, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK.
John Wright2 Yorkshire & Quality Research Group, Bradford Institute for Health Research, Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Bradford BD9 6RJ, UK.
Rebecca Lawton2 Yorkshire & Quality Research Group, Bradford Institute for Health Research, Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Bradford BD9 6RJ, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective Solutions to quality and safety problems exist within healthcare organisations, but to maximise the learning from these positive deviants, we first need to identify them. This study explores using routinely collected, publicly available data in England to identify positively deviant services in one region of the country. Design A mixed methods study undertaken July 2014 to February 2015, employing expert discussion, consensus and statistical modelling to identify indicators of quality and safety, establish a set of criteria to inform decisions about which indicators were robust and useful measures, and whether these could be used to identify positive deviants. Setting Yorkshire and Humber, England. Participants None - analysis based on routinely collected, administrative English hospital data. Main outcome measures We identified 49 indicators of quality and safety from acute care settings across eight data sources. Twenty-six indicators did not allow comparison of quality at the sub-hospital level. Of the 23 remaining indicators, 12 met all criteria and were possible candidates for identifying positive deviants. Results Four indicators (readmission and patient reported outcomes for hip and knee surgery) offered indicators of the same service. These were selected by an expert group as the basis for statistical modelling, which supported identification of one service in Yorkshire and Humber showing a 50% positive deviation from the national average. Conclusion Relatively few indicators of quality and safety relate to a service level, making meaningful comparisons and local improvement based on the measures difficult. It was possible, however, to identify a set of indicators that provided robust measurement of the quality and safety of services providing hip and knee surgery.

Indexed as

Outcome Assessment, Health CareQuality of Health CareDelivery of Health CareEnglandHumansPatient SafetySafety ManagementoutliersPositive deviancequality measurementsafety measurement

Identifiers

PMID29749286
PMCPMC6100151

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.