ReviewJournal of education and health promotion2025
A comprehensive review on strategic purchasing of diagnostic imaging services.
Review in Journal of education and health promotion, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Diagnostic imaging services are one of the rapidly growing services in the healthcare industry and policymakers consider containing the cost of such services as a way to reduce the total cost of healthcare services. This study aimed to identify the components influencing the implementation of strategic purchase of diagnostic imaging services. This comprehensive review was done by searching databases including: Embase, Science Direct, PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, ProQuest, and Persian databases SID, IranDOC, Magiran. Peer review articles in both Persian and English languages were included and those studies with lack of access to the full text and letter to the editor, summary of the book, and expression of views and opinions were excluded. Based on PRISMA statement, 15 original studies and 7 review studies were selected for data collection. The strategic purchasing framework introduced by the World Health Organization was used to analyze data. The dominant design in the original studies was a qualitative approach through interviews with experts, and one study has been conducted specifically in the field of medical equipment. Fifty-six components were identified. The identified components intended to address the five major questions about strategic purchasing; also we added the sixth dimension to the framework, which is strategic purchasing stewardship. Items that were placed in six dimensions were 11, 10, 8, 11, 7, and 10 in stewardship, what to buy, for whom to buy, from whom to buy, at what price to buy, and what mechanism to buy, respectively. In the context of strategic purchasing of diagnostic imaging services, special attention should be paid to the competitive advantages of suppliers, organization structure and history of providers, performance evaluation, and accreditation of providers. It is suggested that the regionalization program of services in different regions and the accreditation of institutions and organizations providing diagnostic imaging services should be considered as the prerequisites of this approach.
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.