Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38594187›Full record

ReviewBMJ open2024

Developing quality indicators for cancer hospitals in China: a national modified Delphi process.

Meicen Liu, Qingyuan Yu, Yuanli Liu

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Coordinated psycho-oncology in young adults with breast cancer: equity gradients, timely access, and out-of-pocket spending in China.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Meicen LiuNational Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.ORCID 0000-0002-4069-2510
Qingyuan YuSchool of Health Policy and Management, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.ORCID 0000-0001-7398-4897
Yuanli LiuSchool of Health Policy and Management, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China liuyuanli_pumc@163.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveAlthough demand and supply of cancer care have been rapidly increasing in recent decades, there is a lack of systemic quality measurement for cancer hospitals in China. This study aimed to develop a set of core indicators for measuring quality of care for cancer hospitals in China.

designThe development of quality indicators was based on a literature review and a two-round modified Delphi survey. The theoretical framework and initial indicators were identified through the comprehensive literature review, and the selection of quality indicators relied on experts' consensus on the importance and feasibility of indicators by the modified Delphi process. In addition, indicator weight was identified using the analytical hierarchical process method and percentage weight method. SETTING AND

participantsA panel of leading experts including oncologists, cancer care nurses, quality management experts from various regions of China were invited to participate in the two-round modified Delphi process from October to December 2020. A total of 25 experts completed the two-round modified Delphi process.

resultsThe experts reached consensus on a set of 47 indicators, comprising 17 structure indicators, 19 process indicators and 11 outcome indicators. Experts gave much higher weight to outcome indicators (accounting for 53.96% relative weight) than to structure (16.34%) and process (29.70%) indicators. In addition, experts also showed concerns and gave suggestions on data availability of specific outcome indicators.

conclusionsDrawing on the comprehensive literature review and the modified Delphi process, this study developed a core set of quality indicators that can be used to evaluate quality performance of cancer hospitals. This is helpful in supporting quality cancer care in China and will provide new insights into the systemic measurement of cancer care internationally.

Indexed as

NeoplasmsQuality Indicators, Health CareCancer Care FacilitiesChinaDelphi TechniqueHumansQuality of Health CareChinaHospitals, PublicONCOLOGYQuality in health care

Identifiers

PMID38594187
PMCPMC11015267

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.