ArticleBMC health services research2022
Development of a performance measurement system for general practitioners' office in China's primary healthcare.
Article 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 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Performance measurement systems in primary health care: a systematic literature review.BMC health services research · 2025Pooled it
- The relationship between effort-reward imbalance and job satisfaction among primary care general practitioners in Gansu of China: the mediating role of public service motivation.Human resources for health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGeneral practitioners are the main providers of primary care services. To better strengthen the important role of general practitioners in primary healthcare services, China is promoting the general practitioners' office system. There is a lack of well-accepted methods to measure the performance of general practitioner offices in China. We thus aim to develop a systematic and operable performance measurement system for evaluating the general practitioner's office.
methodsWe establish an index pool of the performance measurement system of general practitioners' offices by a cross-sectional study and the literature research method and adopt the focus group method to establish the preliminary system. The Delphi method is then used to conduct three rounds of consultation to modify indices, which aims to form the final indicator system. We determine the weight of each index by the analytic hierarchy process method, which together with the final indicator system constitutes the final performance measurement system. Finally, we select three offices from three different cities in Sichuan Province, China, as case offices to conduct the case study, aiming to assess its credibility.
resultsOur results show that the first office scored 958.5 points, the second scored 768.1 points, and the third scored 947.7 points, which corresponds to the reality of these three offices, meaning that the performance measurement system is effective and manoeuvrable.
conclusionsOur study provides support for standardizing the functions of China's general practitioner's office, improving the health service quality of generalists, and providing a theoretical basis for the standardization of the general practitioner's office.
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.