ArticleMayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes2023
Organizational Intent, Organizational Structures, and Reviewer Mental Models Influence Mortality Review Processes.
Article in Mayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes, 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.
- Family Interviews Improve Health Service Recommendations in Mortality Review Process: A Mixed-Methods Assessment.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objective: To identify the factors that influence the mortality review process at health systems, including how mortality review is conducted, cases are adjudicated, and results are used. Methods: We conducted a qualitative analysis of the mortality review processes of 6 US health systems from February 1, 2021 to June 31, 2021. The data sources included individual and small-group semi-structured interviews with mortality review team members and a content analysis of site artifacts (eg, guiding principles, chart abstraction forms, review workflows, and clinical pathways developed from past mortality reviews). We analyzed each site's mortality review process, goals and incentives for mortality review, historical and evolving aspects of mortality review, personnel involved, and post-review use of findings. Results: Across the 6 systems, we interviewed a total of 24 mortality review experts and analyzed 26 site documents. We identified 3 thematic factors that influence mortality review processes: organizational intent, organizational structures for mortality review, and the mental models of individuals involved in the review process. Two subthemes emerged within organizational intent: (1) identifying preventable deaths to lower (clinical or financial) risk and (2) using death cases to guide system improvement. Sites varied in governance and decision rights concerning mortality review and adjudication, with 2 subthemes within organizational structures: (1) centralized-hierarchical and (2) decentralized or multidisciplinary. The analysis of mental models of participating reviewers revealed 2 themes: (1) confirmation of preventability and (2) identification of patterns or "signals." Conclusion: Understanding the factors that influence mortality review allows health systems to better leverage mortality review for institutional improvement and to develop training that builds shared mental models to enhance the review process.
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.