ReviewHealth policy (Amsterdam, Netherlands)2020
Steering by their own lights: Why regulators across Europe use different indicators to measure healthcare quality.
Review in Health policy (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- What makes a good quality indicator set? A systematic review of criteria.International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2021Pooled it
- Welcome to the jungle: collection and evaluation of quality indicators with the QUALICATOR instrument.BMJ quality & safety · 2026Article
- Assessment of the 5-year evaluation for 1st call members of the European Reference Network on Rare Endocrine Conditions (Endo-ERN).Endocrine connections · 2026Review
- Estimating the causal effect of a quality assurance program on quality of care in Germany.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- A study on collaborative governance of excessive medical care based on three-way evolutionary game and simulation.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- One for all? Assessing the quality of Italian hospital care with the "benefit of the doubt" composite indicator methods.Health economics review · 2024Article
- Analysis of Medico-Legal Complaint Data: A Retrospective Study of Three Large Italian University Hospitals.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- The Behavioral and Social Dimension of the Public Health System of European Countries: Descriptive, Canonical, and Factor Analysis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- What should be measured? Nursing education institutions performance: a qualitative study.BMJ open · 2022Article
- The Association Between Patient Safety Culture and Accreditation at Primary Care Centers in Kuwait: A Country-Wide Multi-Method Study.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2022Article
- International comparison of pressure ulcer measures in long-term care facilities: Assessing the methodological robustness of 4 approaches to point prevalence measurement.Journal of tissue viability · 2021Article
- Article
- Organizational Culture, Quality of Care and Leadership Style in Government General Hospitals in Kuwait: A Multimethod Study.Journal of healthcare leadership · 2021Article
- JCI, SKS için bir dizi standart ve gösterge önerisive HIMSS-EMRAM kalite değerlendirme modelleri.Digital healthReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite widespread faith that quality indicators are key to healthcare improvement and regulation, surprisingly little is known about what is actually measured in different countries, nor how, nor why. To address that gap, this article compares the official indicator sets--comprising some 1100 quality measures-- used by statutory hospital regulators in England, Germany, France, and the Netherlands. The findings demonstrate that those countries' regulators strike very different balances in: the dimensions of quality they assess (e.g. between safety, effectiveness, and patient-centredness); the hospital activities they target (e.g. between clinical and non-clinical activities and management); and the 'Donabedian' measurement style of their indicators (between structure, process and outcome indicators). We argue that these contrasts reflect: i) how the distinctive problems facing each country's healthcare system create different 'demand-side' pressures on what national indicator sets measure; and ii) how the configuration of national healthcare systems and governance traditions create 'supply-side' constraints on the kinds of data that regulators can use for indicator construction. Our analysis suggests fundamental differences in the meaning of quality and its measurement across countries that are likely to impede international efforts to benchmark quality and identify best practice.
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.