ArticleBMJ open2020
Promoting leadership and quality improvement through external inspections of management of sepsis in Norwegian hospitals: a focus group study.
Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Role of artificial intelligence in revolutionizing drug discovery.Fundamental research · 2025Review
- External inspection approaches and involvement of stakeholders' views in inspection following serious incidents - a qualitative mixed methods study from the perspectives of regulatory inspectors.BMC health services research · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveInspections and other forms of external assessment may contribute to positive changes in the health services, but the mechanisms of such change remain unclear. We did a study to explore how external inspections may foster clinical improvement in hospitals.
designFocus group study.
settingStatutory inspections of sepsis treatment in hospital emergency departments in Norway.
participantsClinicians, managers and inspection teams involved with the inspections of sepsis treatment in emergency departments at four different hospitals. Twelve focus group interviews were carried out, with a total of 47 participants.
resultsThree themes emerged as central for understanding how the inspections could contribute to clinical improvement in the emergency departments: (1) increasing awareness about the need to improve the quality of care by providing data on clinical performance, (2) building acceptance for improvement through professional credibility and focus on clinical practice, and (3) fostering leadership commitment.
conclusionOur findings suggest that the inspections have the potential to enhance hospital management and staff's understanding of complicated care processes and help strengthen the organisational commitment to bring about systemic quality improvements.
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.