Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33398057›Full record

ArticleJournal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association2021

A practical guide to publishing a quality improvement paper.

Stephen A Pearlman, Jonathan R Swanson

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Barriers and facilitators to disseminating quality improvement and patient safety research: a scoping review.International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2025
    Article
  2. Advancements in neonatology through quality improvement.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2022
    Review
  3. Do quality improvement projects require IRB approval?Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2021
    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

2 authors.

Stephen A PearlmanChristiana Care, Newark, DE, 19718, USA. spearlman@christianacare.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3027-8794
Jonathan R SwansonDepartment of Pediatrics, University of Virginia Children's Hospital, Charlottesville, VA, 22908, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Quality improvement (QI) is a relatively new and evolving field as it applies to healthcare. Hence, publishing a QI paper may present certain challenges as QI differs from standard types of scientific research. Some considerations in writing are inherent to all types of manuscripts submitted for publication, whereas others are unique to QI papers. This paper, the final in a series of eight papers related to QI in the neonatal setting, describes the best practices for writing and publishing QI manuscripts. Common pitfalls to avoid are also highlighted.

Indexed as

PublishingQuality ImprovementHumansInfant, Newborn

Identifiers

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.