ArticleInternational journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care2023
The development of indicators to measure the quality of care in geriatric rehabilitation.
Article in International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care, 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.
- A systematic scoping review and interpretive ethical synthesis of ethical decision-making about physical restraints for older adults in Confucian-influenced care contexts.BMC medical ethics · 2026Article
- Transitioning Towards Quality-of-Care Assessment in Orthotics and Prosthetics Practice.Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation · 2026Article
- "Treat people with human dignity": the perspective of older adults on the quality of geriatric rehabilitation.European geriatric medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Quality of care is an essential aspect of geriatric rehabilitation. Usually, there are national standards for the quality of care or indicators to measure the quality of care. However, this is not the case for geriatric rehabilitation. Therefore, the aim of this study was to develop structure, process, and outcome indicators to measure the quality of geriatric rehabilitation. To develop quality indicators for geriatric rehabilitation, a literature search was performed to identify indicators for all types of rehabilitation that can also be suitable for geriatric rehabilitation. Thereafter, in the qualitative phase, different stakeholders were inte. Indicators from the literature and indicators developed based on the interviews were merged and processed in a questionnaire. Through this questionnaire, elderly care physicians and managers of geriatric rehabilitation facilities were asked to rate the indicators on relevance and feasibility. Indicators that were considered relevant and feasible by the respondents were included in the final quality indicator set for geriatric rehabilitation. Thirty-six indicators suitable for geriatric rehabilitation were identified from the literature. Additionally, 55 quality indicators were developed based on the interviews. Merging the indicators and omitting duplicates resulted in 69 quality indicators. Analysis of the data from the questionnaires resulted in a final set of 27 quality indicators for geriatric rehabilitation that consists of 17 structure, 8 process, and 2 outcome indicators. This study contributes to the quality of geriatric rehabilitation by providing a first set of quality indicators ready to use in practice. Follow-up research is recommended and may include an assessment of the applicability, reliability, and validity of the developed indicator set.
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.