Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33292818›Full record

ArticleImplementation science communications2020

Visual process maps to support implementation efforts: a case example.

Jennifer Kononowech, Zach Landis-Lewis, Joan Carpenter, Mary Ersek, Robert Hogikyan, Cari Levy, Ciaran Phibbs, Winifred Scott, Anne E Sales

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Implementation science communications, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing 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

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Process Mapping to Compare and Improve Management of Abnormal Cervical Cancer Screening Results in Two US Healthcare Systems within the PROSPR Consortium.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Jennifer KononowechCenter for Clinical Management Research, VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, 2800 Plymouth Rd, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA. Jennifer.Kononowech@va.gov.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9683-6739
Zach Landis-LewisUniversity of Michigan Medical School, 300 N. Ingalls Street, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA.
Joan CarpenterCorporal Michael J. Crescenz VAMC, 3900 Woodland Avenue, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA.
Mary ErsekCorporal Michael J. Crescenz VAMC, 3900 Woodland Avenue, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA.
Robert HogikyanVA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, 2215 Fuller Road, Ann Arbor, MI, 48105, USA.
Cari LevyEastern Colorado Health Care System, 1055 Clermont St, Denver, CO, 80220, USA.
Ciaran PhibbsGeriatrics and Extended Care Data and Analysis Center, VA Palo Alto Health Care System, 3801 Miranda Ave, Palo Alto, CA, 94304, USA.
Winifred ScottGeriatrics and Extended Care Data and Analysis Center, VA Palo Alto Health Care System, 3801 Miranda Ave, Palo Alto, CA, 94304, USA.
Anne E SalesCenter for Clinical Management Research, VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, 2800 Plymouth Rd, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA.

Funding

Quality Enhancement Research Initiative QUE 15-288
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundProcess mapping is often used in quality improvement work to examine current processes and workflow and to identify areas to intervene to improve quality. Our objective in this paper is to describe process maps as a visual means of understanding modifiable behaviors and activities, in this case example to ensure that goals of care conversations are part of admitting a veteran in long-term care settings.

methodsWe completed site visits to 6 VA nursing homes and reviewed their current admission processes. We conducted interviews to document behaviors and activities that occur when a veteran is referred to a long-term care setting, during admission, and during mandatory VA reassessments. We created visualizations of the data using process mapping approaches. Process maps for each site were created to document the admission activities for each VA nursing home and were reviewed by the research team to identify consistencies across sites and to identify potential opportunities for implementing goals of care conversations.

resultsWe identified five consistent behaviors that take place when a veteran is referred and admitted in long-term care. These behaviors are assessing, discussing, decision-making, documenting, and re-assessing.

conclusionsBased on the process maps, it seems feasible that the LST note and order template could be completed along with other routine assessment processes. However, this will require more robust multi-disciplinary collaboration among both prescribing and non-prescribing health care providers. Completing the LST template during the current admission process would increase the likelihood that the template is completed in a timely manner, potentially alleviate the perceived time burden, and help with the provision of veteran-centered care.

Indexed as

Goals of Care conversationsLong-term careProcess maps

Identifiers

PMID33292818
PMCPMC7687814

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.