ArticleFrontiers in public health2025
Quantitative analysis of medical quality intelligent management policies in China: a PMC index model approach.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This research aims to address the issues existing in the current assessment of national Medical Quality Intelligent Management policies (MQIMPs). By constructing a scientific, quantitative assessment system, it precisely identifies the strengths and weaknesses of existing policies across various aspects, providing clear direction for policy improvement, and promoting more efficient guidance of practice through intelligent management policies for medical quality. Methods: This study integrates text mining and content analysis techniques to examine the relationship between them. We construct a PMC index model. Then used the PMC index model to conduct a comprehensive assessment of the strengths and limitations of the current MQIMPs. Results: The evaluation indicates that China's current MQIMPs system is relatively well-established, with an overall excellent performance rating. However, notable deficiencies were identified across three key dimensions: Medical Quality Control, Data Support, and Policy Audience. The relatively low scores in these areas clearly demonstrate substantial room for improvement. Conclusion: Based on the comprehensive evaluation of MQIMPs, three key recommendations are proposed. First, from the Medical Quality Control Dimension, consider adding new policies and subdividing governance areas. Second, from the Data Support perspective, establish a data lifecycle governance framework to clarify the policy core content. Third, refine audience segmentation criteria from the Policy Audience dimension. These steps will effectively develop the MQIMPs, enhancing their ability to guide practice and drive national medical quality improvement.
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.