Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36707128›Full record

ArticleSociology of health & illness2023

Varieties of improvement expertise: Knowledge and contestation in health-care improvement.

Alan Cribb, Vikki Entwistle, Polly Mitchell

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sociology of health & illness, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. 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.

Alan CribbCentre for Public Policy Research, King's College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7908-5195
Vikki EntwistleHealth Services Research Unit and School of Divinity, History and Philosophy, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
Polly MitchellCentre for Public Policy Research, King's College London, London, UK.

Funding

Chief Scientist Office HSRU1Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 209811/Z/17/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The 'improvement' of health care is now established and growing as a field of research and practice. This article, based on qualitative data from interviews with 21 senior leaders in this field, analyses the growth of improvement expertise as not simply an expansion but also a multiplication of 'ways of knowing'. It illustrates how health-care improvement is an area where contests about relevant kinds of knowledge, approaches and purposes proliferate and intersect. One dimension of this story relates to the increasing relevance of sociological expertise-both as a disciplinary contributor to this arena of research and practice and as a spur to reflexive critique. The analysis highlights the threat of persistent hierarchies within improvement expertise reproducing and amplifying restricted conceptions of both improvement and 'better' health care.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CareSociologyHumansexpertisehealth service organisationsnorms and valuesquality of careresearch and policysociology of scientific knowledge

Identifiers

PMID36707128
PMCPMC10473975

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.