Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33615023›Full record

ArticleJMA journal2019

Development and Pilot Testing of Quality Indicators for Primary Care in Japan.

Shinji Matsumura, Makiko Ozaki, Momoko Iwamoto, Satoru Kamitani, Manabu Toyama, Kazuhiro Waza, Takahiro Higashi, Seiji Bito

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMA journal, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

8 authors.

Shinji MatsumuraDivision of Clinical Epidemiology, National Hospital Organization Tokyo Medical Center, Tokyo, Japan.
Makiko OzakiInternal Medicine, Horikawa Hospital, Kyoto, Japan.
Momoko IwamotoCenter for Cancer Control and Information Services, Division of Health Service Research, National Cancer Center, Tokyo, Japan.
Satoru KamitaniDepartment of Public Health, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Manabu ToyamaMasuda Clinic, Osaka, Japan.
Kazuhiro WazaWaza Clinic, Chiba, Japan.
Takahiro HigashiCenter for Cancer Control and Information Services, Division of Health Service Research, National Cancer Center, Tokyo, Japan.
Seiji BitoDivision of Clinical Epidemiology, National Hospital Organization Tokyo Medical Center, Tokyo, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionTo the best of our knowledge, no quality indicators (QIs) for primary care provided by local clinics have yet been developed in Japan. We aimed to develop valid and applicable QIs to evaluate primary care in Japan.

methodsTwo focus group interviews were held to identify conceptual categories. Existing indicators for these categories were identified, and initial sets of potential QIs were developed. Using a modified Delphi appropriateness method, a multidisciplinary expert panel then developed and selected the QIs. Feasibility and applicability of these QIs were then confirmed in pilot testing at six local clinics in Hokkaido, Japan. To determine patient acceptance of these quality improvement activities, the survey asked two questions, "Do you think it is preferable that the patients of this clinic be periodically surveyed?" and "Do you think it is preferable that this clinic periodically undergo an external quality review by an independent body?"

resultsSeven categories emerged from the focus group discussions as key components of primary care in Japan. Thirty-nine QIs under five categories (Comprehensive care/Standardized care, Access, Communication, Co-ordination, and Understanding of patient background) were finally selected and named the QIs for Primary Care Practice in Japan. In pilot testing at six primary care clinics in 2015, 65.4% of patients answered favorably to the idea that clinics should conduct regular patient surveys, and 71.8% answered favorably to the idea that clinics should undergo periodic external quality review by an independent body.

conclusionsWe developed QIs to assess primary care services provided by clinics in Japan, for the first time. Although further refinement is required, establishment of these QIs is the first step in quality improvement for primary care practices in Japan.

Indexed as

JapanPrimary CareProgram evaluationQuality indicatorsQuality of care

Identifiers

PMID33615023
PMCPMC7889691

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.