SynthesisBMC health services research2022
A systematic review: the dimensions to evaluate health care performance and an implication during the pandemic.
Synthesis in BMC health services research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Performance measurement systems in primary health care: a systematic literature review.BMC health services research · 2025Pooled it
- Toward QoS Monitoring in IoT Edge Devices Driven Healthcare-A Systematic Literature Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Pooled it
- A Bibliometric Analysis of Performance Measurement and Management in Child and Adolescent Healthcare Services.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Key Performance Indicators Applied in Medicine.International archives of otorhinolaryngology · 2025Article
- Crucial key performance indicators for hospital evaluation: A scoping review.Journal of education and health promotion · 2025Review
- Digital transformation of an academic hospital department: A case study on strategic planning using the balanced scorecard.PLOS digital health · 2023Article
- Evaluation of the implementation progress through key performance indicators in a new multimorbidity patient-centered care model in Chile.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Improving the quality of COVID-19 care in Sierra Leone: A modified Delphi process and serial nationwide assessments of quality of COVID-19 care in Sierra Leone.PLOS global public health · 2023Article
- Engaging physicians and nurses in balanced scorecard evaluation-An implication at Palestinian hospitals and recommendations for policy makers.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Healthcare system preparedness for the next pandemic beyond COVID-19 situation.Journal of preventive medicine and hygiene · 2022Article
- How to Engage Health Care Workers in the Evaluation of Hospitals: Development and Validation of BSC-HCW1-A Cross-Sectional Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Assessing Patient Experience and Attitude: BSC-PATIENT Development, Translation, and Psychometric Evaluation-A Cross-Sectional Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Engaging patients in balanced scorecard evaluation - An implication at Palestinian hospitals and recommendations for policy makers.Frontiers in public health · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe balanced scorecard (BSC) has been implemented to evaluate the performance of health care organizations (HCOs). BSC proved to be effective in improving financial performance and patient satisfaction.
aimThis systematic review aims to identify all the perspectives, dimensions, and KPIs that are vital and most frequently used by health care managers in BSC implementations.
methodsThis systematic review adheres to PRISMA guidelines. The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Google Scholar databases and Google search engine were inspected to find all implementations of BSC at HCO. The risk of bias was assessed using the nonrandomized intervention studies (ROBINS-I) tool to evaluate the quality of observational and quasi-experimental studies and the Cochrane (RoB 2) tool for randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
resultsThere were 33 eligible studies, of which we identified 36 BSC implementations. The categorization and regrouping of the 797 KPIs resulted in 45 subdimensions. The reassembly of these subdimensions resulted in 13 major dimensions: financial, efficiency and effectiveness, availability and quality of supplies and services, managerial tasks, health care workers' (HCWs) scientific development error-free and safety, time, HCW-centeredness, patient-centeredness, technology, and information systems, community care and reputation, HCO building, and communication. On the other hand, this review detected that BSC design modification to include external and managerial perspectives was necessary for many BSC implementations.
conclusionThis review solves the KPI categorization dilemma. It also guides researchers and health care managers in choosing dimensions for future BSC implementations and performance evaluations in general. Consequently, dimension uniformity will improve the data sharing and comparability among studies. Additionally, despite the pandemic negatively influencing many dimensions, the researchers observed a lack of comprehensive HCO performance evaluations. In the same vein, although some resulting dimensions were assessed separately during the pandemic, other dimensions still lack investigation. Last, BSC dimensions may play an essential role in tackling the COVID-19 pandemic. However, further research is required to investigate the BSC implementation effect in mitigating the pandemic consequences on HCO.
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.