Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35781753›Full record

SynthesisAustralasian journal on ageing2022

Quality indicators for home- and community-based aged care: A critical literature review to inform policy directions.

Hui Yuan Foong, Joyce Siette, Mikaela Jorgensen

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Australasian journal on ageing, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. The Cost-Effectiveness of Homecare Services for Adults and Older Adults: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Key performance indicators for pharmaceutical services: A systematic review.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2024
    Review
  8. Article
  9. 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

3 authors.

Hui Yuan FoongCentre for Health Systems and Safety Research, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1415-5903
Joyce SietteCentre for Health Systems and Safety Research, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9568-5847
Mikaela JorgensenCentre for Health Systems and Safety Research, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5490-0819

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesAustralia is lagging behind other countries in implementing quality indicators (QIs) in home- and community-based aged care. This research aimed to identify and appraise home care QI sets used internationally for older adults, to inform the future development and utilisation of QIs in the Australian context.

methodsA systematic search of eligible studies outlining the development and validation of home care QI sets for older adults was undertaken. QIs were categorised using the Donabedian model to identify potential gaps in coverage of key areas of care quality. Each QI was classified as potentially "derivable" or not from existing national routinely collected datasets. Methodological quality was determined using the Appraisal of Indicators through Research and Evaluation instrument.

resultsThree sets of home care QIs developed and used internationally for older adults were identified. Two of the QI sets focused predominantly on clinical and functional aspects of care. Of 45 unique QIs, the majority were outcome measures (93%), with only three QIs measuring care processes (7%), and zero indicators measuring quality in terms of the structure of care (e.g., waiting time to access services). Nearly half of the individual indicators identified would require Australian home care providers to undertake additional data collection. There were significant methodological limitations in the development of QI sets, particularly in the scientific evidence domain.

conclusionsThis review identified important gaps in existing QI sets, which should be considered by policymakers, researchers, and other stakeholders when developing and applying QIs in the Australian setting.

Indexed as

Home Care ServicesQuality Indicators, Health CareAgedAustraliaHumansPolicyQuality of Health Carehome-based aged carehome carequality indicatorsquality measuressocial care

Identifiers

PMID35781753
PMCPMC9542125

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.