SynthesisBMC health services research2024
Development of an admission criterion framework for high-cost medical consumables in governmental hospitals: a systematic review.
Synthesis in BMC health services research, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHigh-cost medical consumables (HMCs) have emerged as significant economic and technological challenges for numerous national healthcare systems. Governmental hospitals play an indispensable role in many national health systems, closely linked to the evaluation of admissions and the management of procurement for HMCs. Nevertheless, many governmental hospitals face avoidable management risks due to the lack of a decision-making tool. In response, we conducted a systematic review to establishing a framework for the admission criteria of HMCs. This framework aims to enhance their effective utilization and maximize economic, clinical, and social benefits.
methodsIn accordance with a systematic review protocol developed for our study, we conducted comprehensive searches in the PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase databases to identify all correlation studies conducted prior to December 31, 2021. Subsequently, two independent reviewers performed a two-round screening process, resulting in the inclusion of 23 articles in our study. Finally, a third reviewer meticulously examined the selected indicators and contributed to the development of the final criterion framework.
resultsThe criterion framework was established with 7 first-level indicators and 23 s-level indicators. Among the first-level indicators, "Clinical Benefit" held the highest significance, with a combined weight of 1.606, followed by "Economic Value" and "Organizational Impact" at 1.497 and 1.159, respectively. At the second level, "Safety" and "Efficacy" carried equal weight in the decision-making tool, with combined weights of approximately 1.300 each and a standard combined weight of 0.130.
conclusionThis admission criteria framework serves as a vital decision-making tool for managing admissions and highlights several crucial evaluation indicators. Economic considerations emerge as the principal determinant in HMCs procurement decisions. Consequently, healthcare managers and decision-makers are recommended to give precedence to value-based healthcare and evidence-based procurement practices. In the long term, governmental hospitals must grapple with the challenge of judiciously allocating limited resources to maximize both social and economic benefits.
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.