Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35609025›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

Protocol for a Delphi consensus study to select indicators of high-quality general practice to achieve Quality Equity and Systems Transformation in Primary Health Care (QUEST-PHC) in Australia.

Phyllis Lau, Samantha Ryan, Penelope Abbott, Kathy Tannous, Steven Trankle, Kath Peters, Andrew Page, Natalie Cochrane, Tim Usherwood, Jennifer Reath

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

10 authors.

Phyllis LauSchool of Medicine, Western Sydney University, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0665-6348
Samantha RyanSchool of Medicine, Western Sydney University, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Penelope AbbottSchool of Medicine, Western Sydney University, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Kathy TannousTranslational Health Research Institute, Western Sydney University, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Steven TrankleSchool of Medicine, Western Sydney University, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Kath PetersTranslational Health Research Institute, Western Sydney University, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Andrew PageTranslational Health Research Institute, Western Sydney University, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Natalie CochraneSchool of Medicine, Western Sydney University, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Tim UsherwoodFaculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Jennifer ReathSchool of Medicine, Western Sydney University, Sydney, NSW, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHigh-quality general practice has been demonstrated to provide cost-effective, equitable health care and improve health outcomes. Yet there is currently not a set of agreed comprehensive indicators in Australia. We have developed 79 evidence-based indicators and their corresponding 129 measures of high-quality general practice. This study aims to achieve consensus on relevant and feasible indicators and measures for the Australian context.

methodsThis Delphi consensus study, approved by WSU Human Research Ethics Committee, consists of three rounds of online survey with general practice experts including general practitioners, practice nurses and primary health network staff. The identified indicators and measures are grouped under an attribute framework aligned with the Quadruple Aim, and further grouped under structures, processes and outcomes according to the Donabedian framework. Participants will rate each indicator and measure for relevance and feasibility, and provide comments and recommendations of additional indicators or measures. In the last round, participants will also be asked their views on the implementation of a quality indicator tool. Each indicator and measure will require ≥70% agreement in both relevance and feasibility to achieve consensus. Aggregated ratings will be statistically analysed for response rates, level of agreement, medians, interquartile ranges and group rankings. Qualitative responses will be analysed thematically using a mixed inductive and deductive approach. DISCUSSION: This protocol will add to the current knowledge of the translation of performance guidelines into quality practice across complex clinical settings and in a variety of different contexts in Australian general practice. The Delphi technique is appropriate to develop consensus between the diverse experts because of its ability to offer anonymity to other participants and minimise bias. Findings will contribute to the design of an assessment tool of high-quality general practice that would enable future primary health care reforms in Australia.

Indexed as

General PracticeAustraliaConsensusDelphi TechniqueHumansPrimary Health CareQuality Indicators, Health Care

Identifiers

PMID35609025
PMCPMC9128979

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.