ArticleBMJ open2023
Development of practice-based quality indicators for the primary care of older adults: a RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method study protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Quality Indicators for the Pharmacological Management of Chronic Non-Cancer Pain in Older Adult Patients: An Integrative Review.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2025Pooled it
- Codeveloping a Set of Quality of Care Indicators for People Living With Multiple Long-Term Conditions in Primary Care: Protocol for a Modified RAND/UCLA Study.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- Clinical Validation of Quality Indicators for the Pharmacological Management of Chronic Non-Cancer Pain in Older Adult Inpatients.Journal of pain research · 2026Article
- Appropriateness of NHS 111 Wales outcomes-using the Call Prioritisation Streaming System: a RAND/UCLA modified Delphi method.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Primary care quality for older adults: Practice-based quality measures derived from a RAND/UCLA appropriateness method study.PloS one · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionOlder adults have high rates of primary care utilisation, and quality primary care has the potential to address their complex medical needs. Family physicians have different levels of knowledge and skills in caring for older patients, which may influence the quality of care delivery and resulting health outcomes. In this study, we aim to establish consensus on practice-based metrics that characterise quality of care for older primary care patients and can be examined using secondary, administrative data. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We describe a two-round RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method (RAM) study to assess the consensus of a technical expert panel. We will recruit pan-Canadian experts who demonstrate excellence in clinical practice or scholarship related to the primary care of older adults. A literature review will generate a candidate list of practice-based quality indicators. The first round aims to evaluate the appropriateness and importance of candidate indicators through an online questionnaire. We will then develop technical definitions for each endorsed indicator using ICES data holdings. Panellists will offer feedback on the technical definitions in a virtual synchronous meeting and provide ratings on the same criteria in a second questionnaire. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Our study has been approved by the Hamilton Integrated Research Ethics Board (Project ID #15545). Findings will be disseminated via manuscripts, presentations and the lead author's thesis. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN17074347.
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.