ArticleFrontiers in public health2024
Digital health and quality of care in Primary Health Care: an evaluation model.
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. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Impact of Digitalization on European General Practice From the Perspective of General Practitioners: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- Logic Models on Health Information Technology-Related Interventions: Scoping Review Across Disciplines.JMIR medical informatics · 2026Article
- Domain-informed weight forecasting: leveraging behavioral and physiological sequences from wearables.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Improving patients' satisfaction through service digitalization: a cross-sectional study based on the theory of psychological empowerment.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Management capacity for stable coronary heart disease in Shanghai community medical institutions: a cross-sectional study.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- A Survey on Digital Solutions for Health Services Management: Features and Use Cases from Brazilian National Literature.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Digital health technologies in Primary Health Care in rural territories: A protocol for scoping review.PloS one · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The implementation of technologies in Primary Health Care with monitoring and evaluation of the quality of health care is fundamental to direct the access and quality of health care in the context of the Sustainable Development Goals. Our objective was to develop a model for evaluating digital health interventions in primary care, considering its impact on first contact, longitudinality, integrality and coordination in health. Methodology: This is an exploratory methodological study of a qualitative nature. This study seeks to explore strategic actors' perceptions of an evaluation model, and was developed in a process between June 2021 and March 2024. The following stages were followed: Identification of previous models available in the literature, model development, model validation, model update. We performed a nominal group consensus technique online with seven experts. Stages taken to define the design of the model: sending the elaborated model, together with an electronic form with 18 subjective questions, such as brainstorming strategy, for recording impressions, judgment of agreement and suggestions; workshop for discussion by videoconference, at the time the objectives and the model diagram were presented, followed by debate with clarification of doubts and suggestions for clarification of the step-by-step design. After incorporating the suggestions, the model agreed upon in the workshop was subjected to another analysis by the same experts, sent in an online Google document, in which possible inconsistencies between the proposed model and the agreed one were verified, as well as the final agreement on the recommended proposal. At the end of this stage, with synchronous and asynchronous remote procedures, consensus was reached. Results: The proposed evaluation model presents as primary categories, structure, process and result. The structure encompasses four indicators, namely, employees; financial resources; infrastructure resources; and regulatory and strategic resources. The process is organized into three dimensions, namely: technical dimension, organizational dimension and relational dimension. The results will be evaluated in products; intermediate results; and impacts (short, medium and long term). The results will be measured by the seven pillars of quality: efficacy, effectiveness, efficiency, optimization, acceptability, legitimacy, equity. Conclusion: This study achieved the goal of developing a model to evaluate digital health interventions in Primary Health Care, helping to identify adequate and useful evaluation methods filling the gap of the lack of quality evaluation standards in the brazilian Digital Health Strategy. It presents an important difference in relation to models from different countries, as it considers the impacts on Primary Health Care quality attributes such as first contact care, longitudinality, integrality and coordination of care. The model will be used by managers and health professionals of Primary Health Care in a case study in Brazil to evaluate the quality of health care. It is expected that the proposed model may be used in other evaluation studies and countries through contextual adaptations.
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.