Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36869326›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2023

The determinants of expert opinion in the development of care pathways: insights from an exploratory cluster analysis.

Matteo Ratti, Osvaldo Milicia, Riccardo Rescinito, Ellen Coeckelberghs, Deborah Seys, Kris Vanhaecht, Massimiliano Panella

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

Article in BMC health services research, 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
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Matteo RattiDepartment of Translational Medicine (DiMeT), University of Piemonte Orientale (UNIUPO), Via Solaroli,17, 28100, Novara, Italy. matteo.ratti@uniupo.it.
Osvaldo MiliciaDepartment of Translational Medicine (DiMeT), University of Piemonte Orientale (UNIUPO), Via Solaroli,17, 28100, Novara, Italy.
Riccardo RescinitoDepartment of Translational Medicine (DiMeT), University of Piemonte Orientale (UNIUPO), Via Solaroli,17, 28100, Novara, Italy.
Ellen CoeckelberghsLeuven Institute for Healthcare Policy, KU Louvain-University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Deborah SeysLeuven Institute for Healthcare Policy, KU Louvain-University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Kris VanhaechtLeuven Institute for Healthcare Policy, KU Louvain-University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Massimiliano PanellaDepartment of Translational Medicine (DiMeT), University of Piemonte Orientale (UNIUPO), Via Solaroli,17, 28100, Novara, Italy.
Università degli Studi del Piemonte Orientale “Amedeo Avogadro” · ITEuropean Pathway Association · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe performed a secondary exploratory cluster analysis on the data collected from the validation phase of the study leading to the development of the model care pathway (CP) for Myasthenia Gravis (MG), in which a panel of 85 international experts were asked some characteristics about themselves and their opinion about the model CP. Our aim was to identify which characteristics of the experts play a role in the genesis of their opinion.

methodsWe extracted the questions probing an opinion and those describing a characteristic of the expert from the original questionnaire. We performed a multiple correspondence analysis (MCA) and a subsequent hierarchical clustering on principal component (HCPC) on the opinion variables, integrating the characteristic variables as supplementary (predicted).

resultsAfter reducing the dimensionality of the questionnaire to three dimensions we noticed that the not-appropriateness judgement of the clinical activities may overlap with the completeness one. From the HCPC it seems that the working setting of the expert may play a crucial role in determining the opinion about the setting of the sub-processes of MG: shifting from a cluster where the experts do not work in sub-specialist settings to one where the experts are working in them, the opinion changes accordingly from a mono-disciplinary setting to a multi-disciplinary one. Another interesting result is that the experience in neuromuscular diseases (NMD) measured in years and the expert typology (whether general neurologist or NMD expert) seem not to contribute significantly to the opinions.

conclusionsThese findings might indicate a poor ability of the expert to discriminate what is not appropriate from what is not complete. Also, the opinion of the expert might be influenced by the working setting, but not by the experience in NMD (as measured in years).

Indexed as

Critical PathwaysCluster AnalysisHumansNeurologistsCare pathwaysCluster analysisExpert opinionFactorial analysisMultiple correspondence analysisMyasthenia gravis

Identifiers

PMID36869326
PMCPMC9983158
OpenAlexW4323044078

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.