ArticleJournal of evidence-based medicine2025
Characteristics of Quality Improvement Projects in Health Services: A Systematic Scoping Review.
Article in Journal of evidence-based medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Implementation and early results of same-day hip and knee replacement in a public hospital without prior same-day surgical experience, a feasibility study.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2026Article
- Employees in the municipal healthcare service experiences with participation in quality improvement collaboratives and the use of the Quality Improvement Model: a qualitative study.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Celiac disease diagnosis in clinical practice: ESPGHAN quality of care survey from 129 pediatric hospitals across 28 countries.Journal of pediatric gastroenterology and nutrition · 2025Article
- Development of a Comprehensive Tool to Assess Rigor When Evaluating Quality Improvement Projects.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveCurrent QI reports within the literature frequently fail to provide enough information regarding interventions, and a significant number of publications do not mention the utilization of a guiding model or framework. The objective of this scoping review was to synthesize the characteristics of hospital-based QI interventions and assess their alignment with recommended quality goals.
methodsThis scoping review followed the JBI methodology for scoping reviews to synthesize existing literature on hospital-based QI interventions and reporting using the PRISMA Extension for scoping reviews. Included studies involved a hospital-based QI intervention that was evaluated through the Development of the Quality Improvement Minimum Quality Criteria Set (QI-MQCS) framework, reporting on hospital users' (i.e., practitioners and patients) data. We searched Medline, CINAHL, Embase and PubMed databases for primary research published between 2015 and 2024. Grey literature was also examined. A narrative synthesis guided the integration of findings.
resultsFrom 1398 identified records, 70 relevant records were included. Results indicate a wide variation in QI frameworks and methods used by the included studies. The QI interventions most frequently assessed were organizational-focused (n = 59), followed by professional-related interventions (n = 41) and patient-care interventions (n = 24). There were multiple facilitators and barriers across organizational, professional, and patient care levels found in the included studies. Examples of facilitators were instrumental in driving successful QI initiatives included education, training, active leadership, and stakeholder engagement. Conversely, barriers such as time constraints, resource limitations, and resistance were highlighted.
conclusionExisting QI publications lack sufficient detail to replicate interventions. Using a model or framework to guide the conduct of a QI-activity may support a more robustly designed and well-conducted project. The variation of reporting characteristics suggests that future research should focus on the development of a pragmatic tool for use by front-line clinicians to support consistent and rigorous conduct of QI projects.
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.