ArticleSystematic reviews2024
Barriers and facilitators to using feedback from clinical quality registries: a scoping review protocol.
Article in Systematic reviews, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Barriers and facilitators to using feedback from clinical quality registries: a scoping review protocol.Systematic reviews · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA clinical quality registry (CQR) is a structured database that systematically collects data to monitor clinical quality and improve healthcare outcomes. The aims of CQRs are to improve treatment plans, assist in decision-making, increase healthcare value, enhance care quality, and reduce healthcare costs by providing feedback to healthcare providers. Feedback to clinicians is used as a quality improvement tool. It provides data to clinicians about their performance, which may contribute to improvement in healthcare outcomes. To the best of our knowledge, previous research on CQRs has primarily focused on factors affecting their use and their impact on healthcare outcomes. In this study, a scoping review is conducted to understand the barriers to and facilitators of using feedback systems from clinical quality registries in acute healthcare settings.
methodsFor this review, Arksey and O'Malley's framework for scoping reviews will be applied. The following electronic databases (MEDLINE via Ovid, CINAHL, and Scopus) and grey literature (Google Scholar) will be systematically searched for qualitative and mixed-method studies (only including qualitative findings) published after 2000 in the English language. Two reviewers will independently screen the articles and extract the data which, subsequently, will be mapped against the COM-B model. DISCUSSION: This review is conducted with the aim of providing valuable insights into the factors that influence the utilisation of feedback from Clinical Quality Registries by healthcare providers, which, in the context of quality improvement, may have significant implications for clinical research, registry science, health policy, and clinical practice. SCOPING REVIEW REGISTRATION: This protocol has been registered prospectively with the Open Science Framework (OSF) ( https://osf.io/fhm4n/ ).
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.