Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33341924›Full record

ArticleHealth care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy2021

Made to Measure: The Ethics of Routine Measurement for Healthcare Improvement.

Polly Mitchell, Alan Cribb, Vikki Entwistle

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. An ethical analysis of policy dialogues.Health research policy and systems · 2023
    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

3 authors.

Polly MitchellSchool of Education, Communication & Society, King's College London, London, UK. polly.mitchell@kcl.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7680-0264
Alan CribbSchool of Education, Communication & Society, King's College London, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7908-5195
Vikki EntwistleHealth Services Research Unit and School of Divinity, History and Philosophy, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0856-4025

Funding

Chief Scientist Office HSRU2Wellcome Trust 209811
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This paper analyses the ethics of routine measurement for healthcare improvement. Routine measurement is an increasingly central part of healthcare system design and is taken to be necessary for successful healthcare improvement efforts. It is widely recognised that the effectiveness of routine measurement in bringing about improvement is limited-it often produces only modest effects or fails to generate anticipated improvements at all. We seek to show that these concerns do not exhaust the ethics of routine measurement. Even if routine measurement does lead to healthcare improvements, it has associated ethical costs which are not necessarily justified by its benefits. We argue that the practice of routine measurement changes the function of the healthcare system, resulting in an unintended and ethically significant transformation of the sector. It is difficult to determine whether such changes are justified or offset by the benefits of routine measurement because there may be no shared understanding of what is 'good' in healthcare by which to compare the benefits of routine measurement with the goods that are precluded by it. We counsel that the practice of routine measurement should proceed with caution and should be recognised to be an ethically significant choice, rather than an inevitability.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CareHumansQuality ImprovementQuality Indicators, Health CareContinuous improvementEthicsHealthcare improvementMeasurementPatient experience

Identifiers

PMID33341924
PMCPMC7870769

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.