ArticleInternational archives of otorhinolaryngology2025
Key Performance Indicators Applied in Medicine.
Article in International archives of otorhinolaryngology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Public Hearing Aid Policies in Brazil: Operational Gaps, Replacement Costs, and Data Governance in the Unified Health System (SUS).International archives of otorhinolaryngology · 2026Review
- Cascade mentoring: a proposal for transforming radiology education in line with the European training curriculum.Insights into imaging · 2026Review
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
Introduction: Key performance indicators (KPIs) measure the critical functions and activities that must be performed in an organization to provide management with an assessment of quantity and quality, from which it can aid strategic decisions to achieve objectives. Objective: To map the literature review on KPIs in the context of medicine. Methods: In the literature review, we adopted a proposed model and made appropriate adaptations to it. The PubMed database was chosen, with filters applied to define a path. The findings of the articles were briefly discussed in comparison with others to highlight specific findings. Results: Almost 100 research articles were eligible for investigation in a wide range of third- and second-degree medical specialties. In these articles, the KPIs are numbered from 1 up to 797 qualitative and quantitative measures. Conclusions: The KPIs are not limited to a financial regime; instead, in the field of medicine, they play an important role in a wide range of medical specialties, from clinics, therapeutics, surgery, pharmacy, research, regulatory affairs, hospitalization, management, and product development. These indicators can be implemented and evaluated by different means, from simple resources such as home visit, telephone survey, cross-comparison with a benchmark, questionnaires, spreadsheets, to the most sophisticated technology, such as IT resources, artificial intelligence, the linear hinges model, the Research and Development/University of California, Los Angeles (RAND/UCLA) appropriateness method, and the Monte Carlo simulation.
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.