ArticleBMJ open quality2023
Identifying value in healthcare transformation initiatives: an evaluation of an approach to benefits realisation.
Article in BMJ open quality, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Intravenous fluid mismanagement: time for national stewardship and quality improvement.BMJ open quality · 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
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Benefits realisation management (BRM) aims to facilitate the process of identifying, measuring and tracking desired benefits derived from a project. Improvement methodology frameworks often describe BRM as integral to identifying and measuring value derived from transformation initiatives within the National Health Service and beyond. Despite this, reporting of benefits realisation plans and methodological approaches to identifying and measuring benefits remains surprisingly scarce.This project aimed to pilot and evaluate the application of a purpose-designed benefits mapping template with seven newly funded transformation projects across three hospitals in the UK. The scope of the template was to identify key project benefits and metrics associated with the project initiatives. Plan-do-study-act (PDSA) cycles were used to capture the approach and utilisation of the template by project teams. These methods also enabled critical review of the template as an enabler to identifying relevant benefits and project metrics.Stakeholder engagement with the templates was variable. This was attributed to clinical pressures induced by the second wave of COVID-19 in the UK. Despite this, teams were able to produce completed templates outlining a number of wide-ranging benefits. Themes of benefits drawn from the maps include patient experience, patient outcomes, staff experience, access to care and efficiency. Qualitative feedback from teams included the reported value of a structured template to help recognise all the potential benefits associated with each project initiative. The PDSA cycles highlighted the template as an early step in BRM. Further components to this process are recommended to include consensus of the key metrics to be measured, a tool that summarises the reporting details of those metrics, and an effective means to collate reported metrics overtime.
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.