Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35206545›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022

What Should Be Considered When Evaluating the Quality of Home Care? A Survey of Expert Opinions on the Evaluation of the Quality of Home Care in Japan.

Seungwon Jeong, Yusuke Inoue, Yasuyuki Arai, Hideki Ohta, Takao Suzuki

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

5 authors.

Seungwon JeongDepartment of Community Welfare, Niimi University, Niimi 718-8585, Japan.ORCID 0000-0003-2919-7508
Yusuke InoueFaculty of Health and Welfare Science, Okayama Prefectural University, Soja 719-1197, Japan.
Yasuyuki AraiIki-iki Clinic Yuki, Yuki 307-0001, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-4091-9324
Hideki OhtaMedical Clinics of ASMss Group, Oyama 323-0014, Japan.
Takao SuzukiDepartment of Social Science, National Center for Geriatrics and Gerontology, Obu 474-8511, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Intending to obtain scientific evidence to use in developing indicators for evaluating the quality of home care, we surveyed doctors, nurses, and other home care professionals to determine the points they consider to be essential in evaluating home care. We investigated all 901 clinics registered to the National Association of Medical Institutions Supporting Home Care and a random sample of 600 Visiting Nurse Service stations registered to the National Association for Visiting Nurse Service in Japan. A total of 539 questionnaire responses were received (response rate: 35.9%). In this study, a factor analysis revealed four factors to be considered when evaluating the quality of home care: (1) patients' and family members' level of satisfaction, (2) home care process, (3) structure of home care, and (4) medical outcomes. The factor of the satisfaction of patients and family members identified in the present study was not considered in previous studies for evaluating the quality of care in Japan. Satisfaction is the point of difference in goals between hospital-based care and home care, and it requires different measurement indicators. Home care professionals expect to help relieve the physical and psychological burden felt by the patient and their family. Thus, on the evaluation indicators of quality of home care, their perspectives from the present study are valuable.

Indexed as

Home Care ServicesNurses, Community HealthHumansJapanSurveys and Questionnairesevaluating the quality of home carehome carequality of care

Identifiers

PMID35206545
PMCPMC8872340

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.