Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31544162›Full record

ArticleBMJ open quality2019

Mapping outcomes in quality improvement and system design activities: the outcome identification loop and system impact model.

Emmanuel Adeoluwa Akinluyi, Keith Ison, P John Clarkson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open quality, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

3 authors.

Emmanuel Adeoluwa AkinluyiMedical Physics, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4215-5559
Keith IsonMedical Physics, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
P John ClarksonDepartment of Engineering, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhether explicit or implicit, models of value are fundamental in quality improvement (QI) initiatives. They embody the desirability of the impact of interventions-with either foresight or hindsight. Increasingly impact is articulated in terms of outcomes, which are often prescribed and sometimes inappropriate. Currently, there is little methodological guidance for deriving an appropriate set of outcomes for a given QI initiative. This paper describes a structured approach for identifying and mapping outcomes. OVERALL APPROACH: Central to the approach presented here is the engagement of teams in the exploration of the system that is being designed into. This methodology has emerged from the analysis and abstraction of existing methods that define systems in terms of outcomes, stakeholders and their analogues. It is based on a sequence of questions that underpin these methods. OUTCOME ELICITATION TOOLS: The fundamental questions of outcome elicitation can be concatenated into a structured process, within the Outcome Identification Loop. This system-analysis process stimulates new insights that can be captured within a System Impact Model.The System Impact Model reconciles principles of intended cause/effect, with knowledge of unintended effects more typically emphasised by risk approaches. This system representation may be used to select sets of outcomes that signify the greatest impact on patients, staff and other stakeholders. It may also be used to identify potential QI interventions and to forecast their impact. DISCUSSION AND

conclusionsThe Outcome Identification Loop has proven to be an effective tool for designing workshops and interviews that engage stakeholders, critically in the early stages of QI planning. By applying this process in different ways, existing knowledge is captured in System Impact Models and mobilised towards QI endeavours.

Indexed as

complexityhealthcare quality improvementhealth services researchpatient-centred careperformance measures

Identifiers

PMID31544162
PMCPMC6730601

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.