ArticleBMJ open quality2024
Development of delivery indicators and delivery enablers for cardiovascular disease in the UK: a modified Delphi study.
Article in BMJ open quality, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionStandards to define and measure quality in healthcare for cardiovascular disease risk reduction and secondary prevention are available, but there is a paucity of indicators that could serve as facilitators of structural change at a system level. This research study aimed to develop a range of delivery indicators to help cardiac clinical networks assess delivery of and progress towards cardiovascular disease objectives.
methodsThis study used an adapted version of the European Society of Cardiology's four-step process for the development of quality indicators. The four steps in this study were as follows: identify critical factors of enablement, construct a list of candidate indicators, select a final set of indicators and assess availability of national data for each indicator. In this iterative process, a core project group of six members was supported by a wider review group of 21 people from the National Health Service (NHS) clinical and management personnel database.
resultsThe core project group identified six relevant cardiovascular disease priorities in the NHS Long Term Plan and used an iterative process to identify 21 critical factors that impact on their implementation. A total of 57 potential indicators that could be measures of implementation were developed. The core project group agreed on a set of 38 candidate indicators that were circulated to the review group for rating. Based on these scores, the core project group excluded 5 indicators to arrive at a final set of 33 delivery indicators. National datasets were available for 22 of the final indicators, which were designated as delivery indicators. The remaining 11, for which national datasets were not available but locally available datasets could be used, were designated as delivery enablers.
conclusionThe suite of delivery indicators and delivery enablers for cardiovascular disease could allow a more focused evaluation of factors that impact on delivery of healthcare for cardiovascular disease.
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.