ArticleJournal of medical systems2020
Assessing healthcare service quality using routinely collected data: Linking information systems in emergency care.
Article in Journal of medical systems, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Use of Mobile Applications for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Tumors in Orthopaedic Oncology - a Systematic Review.Journal of medical systems · 2021Pooled it
- Refining the hospitalization rate: A mixed methods approach to differentiate primary COVID-19 from incidental cases.Infection prevention in practice · 2024Article
- [Digital systems to support emergency medical service : A Germany-wide cross-sectional survey on current availability, utilization and existing challenges].Die Anaesthesiologie · 2022Article
- Forced Centralized Allocation of Patients to Temporarily 'Closed' Emergency Departments.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 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
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Emergency departments need to continuously calculate quality indicators in order to perform structural improvements, improvements in the daily routine, and ad-hoc improvements in everyday life. However, many different actors across multiple disciplines collaborate to provide emergency care. Hence, patient-related data is stored in several information systems, which in turn makes the calculation of quality indicators more difficult. To address this issue, we aim to link and use routinely collected data of the different actors within the emergency care continuum. In order to assess the feasibility of linking and using routinely collected data for quality indicators and whether this approach adds value to the assessment of emergency care quality, we conducted a single case study in a German academic teaching hospital. We analyzed the available data of the existing information systems in the emergency continuum and linked and pre-processed the data. Based on this, we then calculated four quality indicators (Left Without Been Seen, Unplanned Reattendance, Diagnostic Efficiency, and Overload Closure). Lessons learned from the calculation and results of the discussions with staff members that had multiple years of work experience in the emergency department provide a better understanding of the quality of the emergency department, the related challenges during the calculation, and the added value of linking routinely collected data.
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.