Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33975580›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2021

A focused ethnography in the context of a European cancer research hospital accreditation program.

Elisa Mazzini, Francesco Soncini, Loredana Cerullo, Lucia Genovese, Giovanni Apolone, Luca Ghirotto, Giorgio Mazzi, Massimo Costantini

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Elisa MazziniAzienda USL - IRCCS di Reggio Emilia, viale Umberto I, 50, 42123, Reggio Emilia, Italy.
Francesco SonciniIstituto Ortopedico Rizzoli - IRCCS, Via Giulio Cesare Pupilli, 1, 40136, Bologna, Italy.
Loredana CerulloAzienda USL - IRCCS di Reggio Emilia, viale Umberto I, 50, 42123, Reggio Emilia, Italy.
Lucia GenoveseAzienda USL - IRCCS di Reggio Emilia, viale Umberto I, 50, 42123, Reggio Emilia, Italy.
Giovanni ApoloneFondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Via Giacomo Venezian, 1, 20133, Milan, Italy.
Luca GhirottoAzienda USL - IRCCS di Reggio Emilia, viale Umberto I, 50, 42123, Reggio Emilia, Italy.
Giorgio MazziAzienda USL - IRCCS di Reggio Emilia, viale Umberto I, 50, 42123, Reggio Emilia, Italy.
Massimo CostantiniAzienda USL - IRCCS di Reggio Emilia, viale Umberto I, 50, 42123, Reggio Emilia, Italy. massimo.costantini@ausl.re.it.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA quality accreditation program (AP) is designed to guarantee predefined quality standards of healthcare organizations. Evidence of the impact of quality standards remains scarce and somewhat challenging to document. This study aimed to investigate the accreditation of a cancer research hospital (Italy), promoted by the Organization of European Cancer Institutes (OECI), by focusing on the individual, group, and organizational experiences resulting from the OECI AP.

methodsA focused ethnography study was carried out to analyze the relevance of participation in the accreditation process. Twenty-nine key informants were involved in four focus group meetings, and twelve semistructured interviews were conducted with professionals and managers. Inductive qualitative content analysis was applied to examine all transcripts.

resultsFour main categories emerged: a) OECI AP as an opportunity to foster diversity within professional roles; b) OECI AP as a possibility for change; c) perceived barriers; and d) OECI AP-solicited expectations.

conclusionsThe accreditation process is an opportunity for improving the quality and variety of care services for cancer patients through promoting an interdisciplinary approach to care provision. Perceiving accreditation as an opportunity is a prerequisite for overcoming the barriers that professionals involved in the process may report. Critical to a positive change is sharing the values and the framework, which are at the basis of accreditation programs. Improving the information-sharing process among managers and professionals may limit the risk of unmet expectations and prevent demotivation by future accreditation programs. Finally, we found that positive changes are more likely to happen when an accreditation process is considered an activity whose results depend on managers' and professionals' joint work.

Indexed as

AccreditationNeoplasmsAnthropology, CulturalCancer Care FacilitiesHumansItalyAccreditation programsCancerChange managementHealthcare organizationQualitative research

Identifiers

PMID33975580
PMCPMC8111912

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.