ArticlePloS one2018
Quality circles for quality improvement in primary health care: Their origins, spread, effectiveness and lacunae- A scoping review.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 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
41 citing papers in PubMed.
- Optimizing colorectal cancer screening through quality circles of primary care physicians: a cluster randomized controlled trial.International journal of public health · 2026Trial
- Implementation fidelity in a multifaceted program to foster rational antibiotics use in primary care: an observational study.BMC medical research methodology · 2022Trial
- Effects of an interprofessional deprescribing intervention in Swiss nursing homes: the Individual Deprescribing Intervention (IDeI) randomised controlled trial.BMC geriatrics · 2021Trial
- Evaluating the structural reform of outpatient psychotherapy in Germany (ES-RiP trial) - a qualitative study of provider perspectives.BMC health services research · 2021Trial
- Article
- Maximising Embedded Pharmacists in AGed CAre Medication Advisory Committees (MEGA-MAC): protocol for implementing Australia's new guiding principles for medication management in residential aged care facilities using knowledge brokers and a national quality improvement collaborative.Implementation science : IS · 2025Article
- National audit of the structure and function of Australian residential care medication advisory committees.Australasian journal on ageing · 2025Article
- Article
- Experiences of quality cluster meetings in general practice - Findings from a national survey two years after initiation of quality clusters in Denmark.BMC primary care · 2025Article
- The Work-life Check-ins randomized controlled trial: A leader-based adaptive, semi-structured burnout intervention in primary care clinics.Contemporary clinical trials · 2024Article
- E-learning-an interventional element of the PRiVENT project to improve weaning expertise.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- Article
- Article
- From purists to pragmatists: a qualitative evaluation of how implementation processes and contexts shaped the uptake and methodological adaptations of a maternal and neonatal quality improvement programme in South Africa prior to, and during COVID-19.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Successes, weaknesses, and recommendations to strengthen primary health care: a scoping review.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2023Article
- Changes in BMD T-score from pre-to post-treatment with biosimilar teriparatide: A single-arm, multi-center study.Bone reports · 2023Article
- Article
- Impact of a diabetes disease management program on guideline-adherent care, hospitalization risk and health care costs: a propensity score matching study using real-world data.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2023Observational
- Article
- A framework to improve quality of hospital-based physiotherapy: a design-based research study.BMC health services research · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Quality circles or peer review groups, and similar structured small groups of 6-12 health care professionals meet regularly across Europe to reflect on and improve their standard practice. There is debate over their effectiveness in primary health care, especially over their potential to change practitioners' behaviour. Despite their popularity, we could not identify broad surveys of the literature on quality circles in a primary care context. Our scoping review was intended to identify possible definitions of quality circles, their origins, and reported effectiveness in primary health care, and to identify gaps in our knowledge. We searched appropriate databases and included any relevant paper on quality circles published until December 2017. We then compared information we found in the articles to that we found in books and on websites. Our search returned 7824 citations, from which we identified 82 background papers and 58 papers about quality circles. We found that they originated in manufacturing industry and that many countries adopted them for primary health care to continuously improve medical education, professional development, and quality of care. Quality circles are not standardized and their techniques are complex. We identified 19 papers that described individual studies, one paper that summarized 3 studies, and 1 systematic review that suggested that quality circles can effectively change behaviour, though effect sizes varied, depending on topic and context. Studies also suggested participation may affirm self-esteem and increase professional confidence. Because reports of the effect of quality circles on behaviour are variable, we recommend theory-driven research approaches to analyse and improve the effectiveness of this complex intervention.
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.