Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33057652›Full record

ArticleJournal of athletic training2020

Looking to Improve Your Practice? Consider the Science of Quality Improvement to Get Started.

Alison R Snyder Valier

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of athletic training, 2020. 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

1 author.

Alison R Snyder ValierAthletic Training Programs, Department of Interdisciplinary Health Sciences, School of Osteopathic Medicine in Arizona, Research Support, A.T. Still University, Mesa.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Quality improvement in health care is the responsibility of everyone (eg, patients, families, health providers, and administrative staff) to work toward delivering high-quality patient care, advancing professional knowledge and skills, and creating effective and efficient processes of care. Those involved in athletic health care, similar to other health care professionals, should strive to create patient care experiences that are safe, timely, effective, efficient, equitable, and patient centered. Exploring the differences between quality improvement and research will help define the focus of improvement sciences on the health of systems, which is to identify quality gaps and evaluate processes of care, as opposed to filling knowledge gaps. Furthermore, considering the principles of quality improvement will set the foundation for quality initiatives in health care to focus on patients, value teams, emphasize systems and processes of care, appreciate variability, and require data. With a greater understanding of the principles of the quality improvement sciences, athletic trainers will be better positioned to create a culture of quality improvement and to take the initiative in leading improvement efforts so that local systems support the delivery of high-quality patient care.

Indexed as

Sports MedicineHealth PersonnelHealth Services ResearchHumansOutcome and Process Assessment, Health CareProfessionalismQuality Improvementfishbone diagramsmodel for improvementoutcome and process assessmentsystems analysis

Identifiers

PMID33057652
PMCPMC7709208

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.