ArticleBMC primary care2022
Physician participation in quality improvement work- interest and opportunity: a cross-sectional survey.
Article in BMC primary care, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Strategies and tools to learn from work that goes well within healthcare patient safety practices: a mixed methods systematic review.BMC health services research · 2025Pooled it
- Effectiveness of a Population Health Intervention on Disparities in Hypertension Control: A Stepped Wedge Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.Journal of general internal medicine · 2024Trial
- Improving healthcare quality in Sudan: situation and factors influencing healthcare professionals' engagement.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Psychiatrists' experiences with the implementation of safewards and other quality improvement work: an explorative, qualitative interview study.BMC psychiatry · 2025Article
- Organizational characteristics associated with sustained participation in internal quality improvement: Findings from two waves of a national sample of physician practices in the United States.Social science & medicine (1982) · 2025Article
- The First Episode Psychosis Services Fidelity Scale as a Measure of Quality of Care.Schizophrenia bulletin open · 2025Article
- Quality improvement work in general practice; a Norwegian focus group study.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2024Article
- MS brain health quality standards: a survey on the reality in clinical practice in Germany.Neurological research and practice · 2024Article
- Impact of Medical-Pharmaceutical Separation Reform on Hospitalization Expenditure in Tertiary Public Hospitals: Difference-in-Difference Analysis Based on Panel Data from Beijing.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2024Article
- A Web-Based Application for Risk Stratification and Optimization in Patients With Cardiovascular Disease: Pilot Study.JMIR cardio · 2023Article
- Green Cross method in a postanaesthesia care unit: a qualitative study of the healthcare professionals' experiences after 3 years, including the COVID-19 pandemic period.BMJ open quality · 2023Article
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 at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLack of physician involvement in quality improvement threatens the success and sustainability of quality improvement measures. It is therefore important to assess physicians´ interests and opportunities to be involved in quality improvement and their experiences of such participation, both in hospital and general practice.
methodsA cross-sectional postal survey was conducted on a representative sample of physicians in different job positions in Norway in 2019.
resultsThe response rate was 72.6% (1513 of 2085). A large proportion (85.7%) of the physicians wanted to participate in quality improvement, and 68.6% had actively done so in the last year. Physicians' interest in quality improvement and their active participation was significantly related to the designated time for quality improvement in their work-hour schedule (p < 0.001). Only 16.7% reported time designated for quality improvement in their own work hours. When time was designated, 86.6% of the physicians reported participation in quality improvement, compared to 63.7% when time was not specially designated.
conclusionsThis study shows that physicians want to participate in quality improvement, but only a few have designated time to allow continuous involvement. Physicians with designated time participate significantly more. Future quality programs should involve physicians more actively by explicitly designating their time to participate in quality improvement work. We need further studies to explore why managers do not facilitate physicians´ participation in quality improvement.
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.