Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35725249›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2022

Systematic development of quality indicators for skin cancer management in primary care: a mixed-methods study protocol.

Bela Ines Laginha, Frances Rapport, Andrea Smith, David Wilkinson, Anne E Cust, Jeffrey Braithwaite

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

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 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Bela Ines LaginhaFaculty of Medicine, Health and Human Sciences, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-2856-1542
Frances RapportFaculty of Medicine, Health and Human Sciences, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia frances.rapport@mq.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0002-4428-2826
Andrea SmithUniversity of Sydney, a joint venture with Cancer Council NSW, The Daffodil Centre, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
David WilkinsonNational Skin Cancer Centres, South Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Anne E CustUniversity of Sydney, a joint venture with Cancer Council NSW, The Daffodil Centre, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-5331-6370
Jeffrey BraithwaiteFaculty of Medicine, Health and Human Sciences, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-0296-4957
Macquarie University · AUThe University of Sydney · AUCancer Council Queensland · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionAustralia has the highest incidence of skin cancer in the world, with two out of three Australians expected to be diagnosed with skin cancer in their lifetime. Such incidence necessitates large-scale, effective skin cancer management practices. General practitioners (in mainstream practice and in skin cancer clinics) play an important role in skin cancer care provision, making decisions based on relevant evidence-based guidelines, protocols, experience and training. Diversity in these decision-making practices can result in unwarranted variation. Quality indicators are frequently implemented in healthcare contexts to measure performance quality at the level of the clinician and healthcare practice and mitigate unwarranted variation. Such measurements can facilitate performance comparisons between peers and a standard benchmark, often resulting in improved processes and outcomes. A standardised set of quality indicators is yet to be developed in the context of primary care skin cancer management.

aimsThis research aims to identify, develop and generate expert consensus on a core set of quality indicators for skin cancer management in primary care.

methodsThis mixed-methods study involves (1) a scoping review of the available evidence on quality indicators in skin cancer management in primary care, (2) identification and development of a core set of quality indicators through interviews/qualitative proforma surveys with participants, and (3) a focus group involving discussion of quality indicators according to Nominal Group Technique. Qualitative and quantitative data will be collected and analysed using thematic and descriptive statistical analytical methods. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Approval was granted by the university's Research Ethics Committee (HREC no. 520211051532420). Results from this study will be widely disseminated in publications, study presentations, educational events and reports.

Indexed as

Quality Indicators, Health CareSkin NeoplasmsAustraliaConsensus Statements as TopicDelivery of Health CareHumansPrimary Health CareReview Literature as TopicPRIMARY CAREQUALITATIVE RESEARCHQuality in health care

Identifiers

PMID35725249
PMCPMC9214379
OpenAlexW4283163296

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.