ArticleBMC family practice2019
Understanding accreditation standards in general practice - a qualitative study.
Article in BMC family practice, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Mediators of change in healthcare organisations subject to external assessment: a systematic review with narrative synthesis.BMJ open · 2020Pooled it
- Beyond intentions: a critical narrative review of accreditation's planned and emergent impact on medical schools.Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice · 2026Review
- How can Iran's hospital accreditation standards align with ISQua?BMC health services research · 2026Article
- The co-production process of an assessment programme: Between clarifying identity and developing the quality of French-speaking Belgian community health centres.Health research policy and systems · 2024Article
- The Prerequisites of Executing the Accreditation Program for Primary Healthcare: A Systematic Review and Meta-Synthesis.Iranian journal of public health · 2024Review
- Accreditation of primary health care centres in the KSA: Lessons from developed and developing countries.Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences · 2023Article
- What GPs do to meet accreditation standards - implementation activities and perceived improvements attributed to general practice accreditation.BMC primary care · 2022Article
- The attitudes of hospital directors towards normalising accreditation standards: A qualitative descriptive study for Saudi Arabia.International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2022Article
- Introducing quality clusters in general practice - a qualitative study of the experiences of cluster coordinators.BMC primary care · 2022Article
- Characterization of Communes with Quality Accredited Primary Healthcare Centers in Chile.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Implementation of healthcare accreditation in Danish general practice: a questionnaire study exploring general practitioners' perspectives on external support.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2021Article
- Experiences of accreditation impact in general practice - a qualitative study among general practitioners and their staff.BMC family practice · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAccreditation is a widely adopted tool for quality control and quality improvement in health care, which has increasingly been employed for general practice. However, there is lack of knowledge of how accreditation is received and experienced by health professionals in general practice. This study explores how general practitioners (GPs) and their staff experienced the comprehensibility of accreditation standards and how they worked to increase their understanding of the standards. The study was conducted in Denmark where accreditation was mandatory in general practice from 2016 to 2018.
methodsThe study consists of qualitative interviews with general practitioners and staff from 11 general practices that were strategically sampled among practices set to receive their survey visit in 2017. Participants were interviewed twice; once during the preparation phase and once after the survey visit. GPs and staff were interviewed separately. The interviews were analysed inductively using thematic analysis.
resultsUnderstanding the requirements of the accreditation standards was a major challenge for the professionals when preparing for the accreditation survey visit. The participants attempted to increase their understanding of the standards in several ways including the use of regional support options and seeking out experts and colleagues. However, participants had mixed experiences with the various support options and many found the sense making work frustrating and time consuming.
conclusionThe results point to the importance of considering the level of specificity in accreditation standards and how to ensure an organisational set-up that can offer appropriate support to primary care clinics in terms of understanding what is required to meet the standards.
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.