SynthesisBMJ global health2021
Assessing the quality of care for children attending health facilities: a systematic review of assessment tools.
Synthesis in BMJ global health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Private sector quality of care for maternal, new-born, and child health in low-and-middle-income countries: a secondary review.Frontiers in global women's health · 2024Pooled it
- Quality of care for children with acute respiratory infections in health facilities: a comparative analysis of assessment tools.Journal of global health · 2022Pooled it
- Assessing the quality of care in low- and middle-income countries: a rapid review of the landscape of assessment tools.BMJ global health · 2026Review
- How Healthcare Professionals Perceive Emergency Pediatric Care Provision in Two Public Hospitals in Greece: A Cross-Sectional Study.Pediatric reports · 2026Article
- Development of a survey tool to measure pediatric experience of care: Cognitive testing and validation in the Laos.PLOS global public health · 2026Article
- Bridging the diagnostic gap: diagnostic capacity and pediatric quality of care in LMICs.BMC medicine · 2025Article
- Quality Care Assessment of Maternal and Child Health Services Among Women in Sagar City: A Cross-Sectional Study.Cureus · 2025Article
- Quality of sick child management by health extension workers: role of a complex improvement intervention.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Baseline assessment of the WHO/UNICEF/UNFPA maternal and newborn quality-of-care standards around childbirth: Results from an intermediate hospital, northeast Namibia.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2022Article
- Monitoring healthcare improvement for mothers and newborns: A quantitative review of WHO/UNICEF/UNFPA standards using Every Mother Every Newborn assessment tools.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionAssessing quality of healthcare is integral in determining progress towards equitable health outcomes worldwide. Using the WHO 'Standards for improving quality of care for children and young adolescents in health facilities' as a reference standard, we aimed to evaluate existing tools that assess quality of care for children.
methodsWe undertook a systematic literature review of publications/reports between 2008 and 2020 that reported use of quality of care assessment tools for children (<15 years) in health facilities. Identified tools were reviewed against the 40 quality statements and 510 quality measures from the WHO Standards to determine the extent each tool was consistent with the WHO Standards. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO ID: CRD42020175652.
resultsNine assessment tools met inclusion criteria. Two hospital care tools developed by WHO-Europe and WHO-South-East Asia Offices had the most consistency with the WHO Standards, assessing 291 (57·1%) and 208 (40·8%) of the 510 quality measures, respectively. Remaining tools included between 33 (6·5%) and 206 (40·4%) of the 510 quality measures. The WHO-Europe tool was the only tool to assess all 40 quality statements. The most common quality measures absent were related to experience of care, particularly provision of educational, emotional and psychosocial support to children and families, and fulfilment of children's rights during care.
conclusionQuality of care assessment tools for children in health facilities are missing some key elements highlighted by the WHO Standards. The WHO Standards are, however, extensive and applying all the quality measures in every setting may not be feasible. A consensus of key indicators to monitor the WHO Standards is required. Existing tools could be modified to include priority indicators to strengthen progress reporting towards delivering quality health services for children. In doing so, a balance between comprehensiveness and practical utility is needed. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020175652.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.