ArticleBJPsych bulletin2020
Quality improvement in mental health services.
Article in BJPsych bulletin, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- How is return on investment from quality improvement programmes conceptualised by mental healthcare leaders and why: a qualitative study.BMC health services research · 2023Review
- Content and process: using continuous quality improvement to teach and evaluate learning outcomes in quality improvement residency education.BMJ open quality · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Quality improvement (QI) approaches are becoming increasingly important in the delivery of mental healthcare internationally. They were originally developed in the manufacturing industry, but the principle of having a systematic approach to improvement has spread to many other industries, not least to healthcare. Quality improvement approaches in healthcare were pioneered in the USA at organisations such as Virginia Mason and the Institute for Healthcare Improvement. In recent years, they have become firmly established in mental health services in the UK's National Health Service (NHS). There are a number of different approaches to quality improvement, but two leading models have taken root: 'lean thinking' (also known as 'lean methodology' or simply 'lean'), which arose out of Virginia Mason, and the 'Model for Improvement', which came out of the Institute of Healthcare Improvement. This article describes these two quality improvement approaches, critiques their philosophy and explores how they can apply in the provision of mental healthcare, particularly with reference to the use of data, evidence and metrics.
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.