ArticleBMJ open quality2025
Key clinical findings from the IMPROVE-UK quality improvement projects: an overview.
Article in BMJ open quality, 2025. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSurvival from ovarian cancer in the UK is poor compared with international comparators. The Ovarian Cancer Audit Feasibility Pilot demonstrated variation in 1-year and 5-year survival across the UK as well as significant variation in treatment rates. In 2020, IMPROVE-UK was established as the first major programme to address inequalities in ovarian cancer management and survival across the UK, to develop a legacy of best practice sharing across the country and to establish and evaluate quality improvement projects that could drive care at scale.
methodsFollowing a competitive process, seven quality improvement projects were funded to address inequalities in care and identify strategies to improve and equalise survival rates for all women with ovarian cancer in the UK, to address health inequalities from geography, age or ethnicity.
resultsProjects addressed the secondary care diagnostic pathway, genomic testing, prehabilitation and improving treatment-related decision-making, particularly decisions for surgery. All seven projects at least partial achieved their aims with numerous areas across all projects identified where processes could be refined and incorporated into standard care to improve outcomes of women diagnosed with ovarian cancer. Dissemination of information regarding best practice has been undertaken.
conclusionIMPROVE-UK was the first programme of its kind addressing significant inequalities of care in women with ovarian cancer. We demonstrate systematic quality improvement projects in ovarian cancer targeting various aspects of the treatment journey. Scaling up the results of the improve UK pilots is likely to improve survival in the UK and potentially internationally.
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.