ArticlePloS one2024
Selection of primary health care quality indicators in Europe: A Delphi study protocol.
Article in PloS one, 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
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo describe a protocol to achieve consensus on valid and important indicators to assess primary health care (PHC) quality regarding all clinical contexts of PHC in European health systems. STUDY
designQualitative study using the Delphi technique to gain consensus among European panels of experts comprising a heterogeneous professional background.
methodsPotential candidate indicators were extracted and translated according to a set of informative elements (i.e., name, description, formula, unit of analysis, and sources). This list was then independently reviewed, and duplicates were removed totaling 1726 indicators. To guarantee a good response rate, indicators were distributed across 57 Delphi panels organized by clinical context. Each panel is a Delphi process, assessing between 23 to 33 indicators. Experts' opinions on the validity and importance of the extracted indicators will be obtained through two rounds of online questionnaires, using a 9-point Likert scale and free-text boxes. To prevent biased responses, participation will be anonymous to other participants and to the team administrating panels. Consensus will be considered if at least 70% of ratings (≥7 assuming 10 participants) lie within the 7-9 range and less than 15% of ratings (<2 assuming 10 participants) are in the 1-3 range. Analysis of results will be streamlined and generalizable across panels using scripts.
conclusionsThis protocol will contribute to improve the quality of PHC in Europe by achieving a consensual and concise list of PHC quality indicators retrieved from the scientific literature that fit current clinical guidelines and populations' needs in countries from the European region according to the World Health Organization.
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.