ArticleBMJ open2022
WHO standards-based tools to measure service providers' and service users' views on the quality of hospital child care: development and validation in Italy.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Health workers' perspectives on the quality of maternal and newborn health care around the time of childbirth: Results of the Improving MAternal Newborn carE in the EURO Region (IMAgiNE EURO) project in 12 countries of the World Health Organization European Region.Journal of global health · 2024Trial
- Article
- Quality Care Assessment of Maternal and Child Health Services Among Women in Sagar City: A Cross-Sectional Study.Cureus · 2025Article
- Lesson in understanding parents' perspective: perception of quality of care and COVID-19-related fears among users of paediatric health services over the COVID-19 pandemic in 11 facilities in Italy.BMJ paediatrics open · 2024Article
- Implementation of the WHO Standards to assess quality of paediatric care at the facility level using service users' perspective as source of data: a multicentre quality improvement study in Italy.BMJ paediatrics open · 2024Article
- Implementation of the WHO standards to assess quality of care for children with acute pain in EDs: findings of a multicentre study (CHOICE) in Italy.BMJ paediatrics open · 2024Observational
- Implementation of the WHO Standards to assess the quality of paediatric care using health workers as source of data: findings of a multicentre study (CHOICE) in Italy.BMJ paediatrics open · 2024Article
- Evaluation of the WHO standards to assess quality of care for children with acute respiratory infections: findings of a baseline multicentre assessment (CHOICE) in Italy.BMJ paediatrics open · 2024Observational
- Implementation of the WHO standards to assess the quality of care for children with acute diarrhoea: findings of a multicentre study (CHOICE) in Italy.BMJ paediatrics open · 2024Observational
- Women's experiences and views on early breastfeeding during the COVID-19 pandemic in Norway: quantitative and qualitative findings from the IMAgiNE EURO study.International breastfeeding journal · 2023Article
- Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 10 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesEvidence showed that, even in high-income countries, children and adolescents may not receive high quality of care (QOC). We describe the development and initial validation, in Italy, of two WHO standards-based questionnaires to conduct an assessment of QOC for children and young adolescents at inpatient level, based on the provider and user perspectives.
designMultiphase, mixed-methods study. SETTING, PARTICIPANTS AND
methodsThe two questionnaires were developed in four phases equally conducted for each tool. Phase 1 which included the prioritisation of the WHO Quality Measures according to predefined criteria and the development of the draft questionnaires. In phase 2 content face validation of the draft questionnaires was assessed among both experts and end-users. In phase 3 the optimised questionnaires were field tested to assess acceptability, perceived utility and comprehensiveness (N=163 end-users). In phase 4 intrarater reliability and internal consistency were evaluated (N=170 and N=301 end-users, respectively).
resultsThe final questionnaires included 150 WHO Quality Measures. Observed face validity was excellent (kappa value of 1). The field test resulted in response rates of 98% and 76% for service users and health providers, respectively. Among respondents, 96.9% service users and 90.4% providers rated the questionnaires as useful, and 86.9% and 93.9%, respectively rated them as comprehensive. Intrarater reliability was good, with Cohen's kappa values exceeding 0.70. Cronbach alpha values ranged from 0.83 to 0.95, indicating excellent internal consistency.
conclusionsStudy findings suggest these tools developed have good content and face validity, high acceptability and perceived utility, and good intrarater reliability and internal consistency, and therefore could be used in health facilities in Italy and similar contexts. Priority areas for future research include how tools measuring paediatric QOC can be more effectively used to help health professionals provide the best possible care.
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.