ArticlePatient preference and adherence2020
Relationships Between Context, Process, and Outcome Indicators to Assess Quality of Physiotherapy Care in Patients with Whiplash-Associated Disorders: Applying Donabedian's Model of Care.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Multi-stakeholder validation of an evidence-based core set of quality indicators for IBD in Belgium.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- ICU Nurses' Perception of Sensitive Indicators of Quality of Care for ECMO Patients in Guizhou Province, China: A Cross-Sectional Study.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2024Article
- Exploratory Study of Associations and Agreement between Prognostic Patient-Registered Factors, Physiotherapists' Intuitive Synthesis, and Patient-Reported Factors in Whiplash-Associated Disorders.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- A practice test and selection of a core set of outcome-based quality indicators in Dutch primary care physical therapy for patients with COPD: a cohort study.ERJ open research · 2022Article
- Improved quality of physiotherapy care in patients with Whiplash-Associated Disorders: Results based on 16 years of routinely collected data.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Patient-Reported Outcome-Based Quality Indicators in Dutch Primary Care Physical Therapy for Patients With Nonspecific Low Back Pain: A Cohort Study.Physical therapy · 2021Article
- Clinical Characteristics and Patient-Reported Outcomes of Primary Care Physiotherapy in Patients with Whiplash-Associated Disorders: A Longitudinal Observational Study.Patient preference and adherence · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 10 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundQuality indicators (QIs) are measurable elements of practice performance and may relate to context, process, outcome and structure. A valid set of QIs have been developed, reflecting the clinical reasoning used in primary care physiotherapy for patients with whiplash-associated disorders (WAD). Donabedian's model postulates relationships between the constructs of quality of care, acting in a virtuous circle.
aimTo explore the relative strengths of the relationships between context, process, and outcome indicators in the assessment of primary care physiotherapy in patients with WAD. MATERIALS AND
methodsData on WAD patients (N=810) were collected over a period of 16 years in primary care physiotherapy practices by means of patients records. This routinely collected dataset (RCD-WAD) was classified in context, process, and outcome variables and analyzed retrospectively. Clinically relevant variables were selected based on expert consensus. Associations were expressed, using zero-order, as Spearman rank correlation coefficients (criterion:
resultsIn round 1, 62 of 85 (72.9%) variables were selected by an expert panel as relevant for clinical reasoning; in round 2, 34 of 62 (54.8%) (context variables 9 of 18 [50.0%]; process variables 18 of 34 [52.9]; outcome variables 8 of 10 [90.0%]) as highly relevant. Associations between the selected context and process variables ranged from 0.27 to 0.53 (p≤0.00), between selected context and outcome variables from 0.26 to 0.55 (p≤0.00), and between selected process and outcome variables from 0.29 to 0.59 (p≤0.00). Moderate associations
conclusionThe identified associations between selected context, process, and outcome variables were fair to moderate. Ongoing work may clarify some of these associations and provide guidance to physiotherapists on how best to improve the quality of clinical reasoning in terms of relationships between context, process, and outcome in the management of patients with WAD.
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.