Trial reportThe Permanente journal2025
A Humanistic Approach to Improvement: The Multiple Sclerosis Continuous Quality Improvement Collaborative Coaching Approach.
Trial report in The Permanente journal, 2025. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMultiple sclerosis (MS) is a costly, chronic, complex condition, which requires customization of care at the system level to achieve better outcomes. The authors describe a cluster-randomized, coach-supported quality improvement (QI) intervention in the MS continuous QI (MS-CQI) Collaborative, which was a multicenter learning health system (LHS) study to improve MS outcomes (2018-2022).
methodsThe authors developed a coach-supported QI intervention within the MS-CQI LHS, which included aspects of standard QI approaches utilized in health care. This included a 12-step standardized QI Toolkit; team coaching twice monthly; team capability assessments; and patient-reported and clinical feedback data provided by the MS-CQI data registry. Assessments helped the coach understand clinic culture, readiness for change, QI skills and knowledge, and progress over time. The coach monitored and guided team activity and assured general adherence to the 12-step improvement process. Teams selected local QI activities within those constraints.
resultsA total of 3 out of the 4 MS-CQI centers were cluster randomized to the intervention and completed the study. Initial QI assessments revealed that teams perceived QI as important but had low initial skill and knowledge levels. Improved QI skills, knowledge, and engagement in the intervention improved, as teams realized ownership and perceived benefits.
conclusionsThe coach-supported QI intervention demonstrated basic feasibility, acceptability, QI skill advancement, and utility in the MS-CQI study. It is an example of an LHS-enabled humanistic (QI team-focused) intervention, which invests in developing capability of people involved in QI work.
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.