ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Development of a Tool to Assess the Implementation and Perception of the Value-Based Healthcare Model: Our Results.
Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesA successful implementation of VBHC requires significant transformations, spanning from structural adjustments to a fundamental shift in organizational culture. However, organizations often adopt VBHC principles piecemeal, while managers overlook diverse staff reactions and their leadership role. To address these challenges, we developed and validated a multi-source assessment tool for use by organizations during their transition to VBHC to determine whether they are progressing effectively in both the dimensions.
methodTo develop the first version of the tool, a multidisciplinary group translated strategies identified in a previous scoping review into questionnaire items through structured sessions. To validate it, a two round Delphi analysis was conducted. Experts in VBHC, management, health economy and clinical/researcher were contacted to ask for their participation. Consensus was established based on the following criteria: a median (Mdn) score of ≥4, an interquartile range (IQR) of ≤1.5 or ≤2, and a frequency of ratings in the range [4-5] ≥ 70%.
resultsA total of 54 experts were invited to participate in the Delphi survey. The first round received 25 responses, while the second round had 23 responses. The final version of the assessment tool consists of 30 questions divided into two macro-areas: the Value Agenda Section and the Change Management Section. All items achieved a minimum frequency of ratings > 80% during both the rounds.
conclusionBy comparing the perspectives of managers and clinicians, the resulting tool enables organizations to assess the adoption of the Value Agenda component, as well as the change management strategies supporting its implementation.
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.