ArticleFrontiers in public health2024
Development of an assessment tool for designated medical institutions in China--Based on the application of an online assessment system.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Due to the expanding coverage of medical insurance and the growth of medical expenses, the ability to assess the performance of designated medical institutions (DMIs) in supporting the delivery of high-quality patient care and the standardized use of funds represents a priority in China. Despite such interest, there has yet to be an operable standard and labor-saving method for assessing DMIs in China. Objective: The main objectives include two aspects: (1) establishing an evaluation index system for DMIs based on contracts; (2) designing and developing an online evaluation platform. Methods: A group of 20 experts with theoretical and practical expertise in medical insurance regulation and performance evaluation were invited to select available indicators. A combination weighting method based on analytic hierarchy process and entropy method was used to determine the weight coefficient. Shanghai was taken as the sample area, and 760 DMIs were included in the empirical research. The test-retest reliability method and criterion-related validity method was used to test the reliability and the validity of the evaluation result. Results: An assessment index system that included 6 domains and 56 indicators was established in this study. Furthermore, we developed an online platform to assist in the implementation of the assessment. The results showed that the average score of assessment was 94.39, the median was 96.92. The test-retest reliability value was 0.96 (P ≤ 0.01), which indicated high stability of the assessment. In addition, there was a significant negative relationship between assessment score and the penalty amount of DMIs (R = -0.133, Conclusions: This study established an operable assessment measure and developed an online platform to assess the performance of DMIs. The results showed good feasibility and reliability in empirical research. Our research findings provided an operable Chinese solution for DMI assessment that saves manpower and time, which would have good enlightening significance in other regions of China and in low-income and middle-income countries internationally.
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.