ArticleBMC health services research2023
Prerequisites, barriers and opportunities in care for Q-fever patients: a Delphi study among healthcare workers.
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 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Opportunities and barriers in care for patients with post COVID-19 condition: a Delphi study among healthcare workers.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Health care provider knowledge regarding the prevention of Coxiella burnetii infection (Q fever).Journal of education and health promotion · 2025Article
- Exploring patient experiences of illness and diagnostic pathways in self-reported Q fever cases.Frontiers in public 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
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundQ-fever is a zoonotic disease that can lead to illness, disability and death. This study aimed to provide insight into the perspectives of healthcare workers (HCWs) on prerequisites, barriers and opportunities in care for Q-fever patients.
methodsA two-round online Delphi study was conducted among 94 Dutch HCWs involved in care for Q-fever patients. The questionnaires contained questions on prerequisites for high quality, barriers and facilitators in care, knowledge of Q-fever, and optimization of care. For multiple choice, ranking and Likert scale questions, frequencies were reported, while for rating and numerical questions, the median and interquartile range (IQR) were reported.
resultsThe panel rated the care for Q-fever patients at a median score of 6/10 (IQR = 2). Sufficient knowledge of Q-fever among HCWs (36%), financial compensation of care (30%) and recognition of the disease by HCWs (26%) were considered the most important prerequisites for high quality care. A lack of knowledge was identified as the most important barrier (76%) and continuing medical education as the primary method for improving HCWs' knowledge (76%). HCWs rated their own knowledge at a median score of 8/10 (IQR = 1) and the general knowledge of other HCWs at a 5/10 (IQR = 2). According to HCWs, a median of eight healthcare providers (IQR = 4) should be involved in the care for Q-fever fatigue syndrome (QFS) and a median of seven (IQR = 5) in chronic Q-fever care.
conclusionsTen years after the Dutch Q-fever epidemic, HCWs indicate that the long-term care for Q-fever patients leaves much room for improvement. Facilitation of reported prerequisites for high quality care, improved knowledge among HCWs, clearly defined roles and responsibilities, and guidance on how to support patients could possibly improve quality of care. These prerequisites may also improve care for patients with persisting symptoms due to other infectious diseases, such as COVID-19.
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.