Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35260956›Full record

SynthesisJournal of general internal medicine2022

Quality Indicators for High-Need Patients: a Systematic Review.

Todd Schneberk, Maria Bolshakova, Kylie Sloan, Evelyn Chang, Julia Stal, Jennifer Dinalo, Elvira Jimenez, Aneesa Motala, Susanne Hempel

Open access · bronzeAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of general internal medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Risk Profiles in Hospitalized Adults Based on Functional Capacity, Pressure Injury Risk, and Fall Risk: A Cluster and Multiple Correspondence Analysis.Journal of nursing scholarship : an official publication of Sigma Theta Tau International Honor Society of Nursing · 2026
    Observational
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. 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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Todd SchneberkGehr Center for Health Systems Science and Innovation, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, GNH 1011, 1200 N State Street Rm 1011, Los Angeles, CA, 90033, USA. todd.schneberk@med.usc.edu.ORCID 0000-0003-1642-2075
Maria BolshakovaSouthern California Evidence Review Center, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Kylie SloanSouthern California Evidence Review Center, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Evelyn ChangVA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, Sepulveda, CA, USA.
Julia StalSouthern California Evidence Review Center, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Jennifer DinaloSouthern California Evidence Review Center, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Elvira JimenezVA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, Sepulveda, CA, USA.
Aneesa MotalaGehr Center for Health Systems Science and Innovation, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, GNH 1011, 1200 N State Street Rm 1011, Los Angeles, CA, 90033, USA.
Susanne HempelGehr Center for Health Systems Science and Innovation, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, GNH 1011, 1200 N State Street Rm 1011, Los Angeles, CA, 90033, USA.
University of Southern California · USVA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHealthcare systems are increasingly implementing programs for high-need patients, who often have multiple chronic conditions and complex social situations. Little, however, is known about quality indicators that might guide healthcare organizations and providers in improving care for high-need patients. We sought to conduct a systematic review to identify potential quality indicators for high-need patients.

methodsThis systematic review (CRD42020215917) searched PubMed, CINAHL, and EMBASE; guideline clearing houses ECRI and GIN; and Google scholar. We included publications suggesting, evaluating, and utilizing indicators to assess quality of care for high-need patients. Critical appraisal of the indicators addressed the development process, endorsement and adoption, and characteristics, such as feasibility. We standardized indicators by patient population subgroups to facilitate comparisons across different indicator groups.

resultsThe search identified 6964 citations. Of these, 1382 publications were obtained as full text, and 53 studies met inclusion criteria. We identified over 1700 quality indicators across studies. Quality indicator characteristics varied widely. The scope of the selected indicators ranged from detailed criterion (e.g., "annual eye exam") to very broad categories (e.g., "care coordination"). Some publications suggested disease condition-specific indicators (e.g., diabetes), some used condition-independent criteria (e.g., "documentation of the medication list in the medical record available to all care agencies"), and some publications used a mixture of indicator types. DISCUSSION: We identified and evaluated existing quality indicators for a complex, heterogeneous patient group. Although some quality indicators were not disease-specific, we found very few that accounted for social determinants of health and behavioral factors. More research is needed to develop quality indicators that address patient risk factors.

Indexed as

Diabetes MellitusQuality Indicators, Health CareDelivery of Health CareHumanscomplex patientsfrequent utilizationhigh-needhigh utilizerindicatorquality

Identifiers

PMID35260956
PMCPMC9485370
OpenAlexW4221107968

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.