ArticleBMC health services research2025
Assessing healthcare organizations' readiness to implement a learning health system: questionnaire validation using a Delphi method.
Article in BMC health services research, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAdopting a learning health system (LHS) approach holds promise for bridging knowledge between policymakers, health professionals, managers, researchers, and patients and their families to collaboratively improve health care. Organizational readiness assessments exist in the quality improvement literature, but may not consider LHS components. This study aimed to establish the content validity of a new LHS readiness questionnaire.
methodsA three-round Delphi study was conducted to establish consensus on the importance, relevance, clarity, and comprehensiveness of the domains and items included in this questionnaire. Purposive sampling was used to recruit participants with expertise in LHS who are involved in healthcare organizations across Canada and internationally (n = 41). A minimum of 70% agreement represented consensus. A steering committee reviewed findings and refined items for clarity. Modified items were re-tested in subsequent rounds.
resultsIn Round 1, 85 items were tested, of which 41 achieved consensus, 7 were removed, 21 underwent major modification, 16 were clarified and retested, and 11 new items were proposed. Round 2 tested 36 items (25 revised, 11 new). 18 items achieved consensus, 8 were removed, and 10 were modified. In Round 3, 10 items were tested, 5 achieved consensus, 1 was removed, and 4 were clarified and included post-expert panel discussion. Overall, 41 items were retained in their original form, 20 were modified, and 7 new items were added. The final measure includes 68 items reflected by four domains: (1) performance to data (n = 13 items), (2) data to knowledge (n = 13 items), (3) knowledge to performance (n = 22 items), and (4) LHS core values (n = 20 items).
conclusionThe proposed new measure can help establish organizational readiness for change. Future research should seek to test the psychometric properties of this tool and explore potential barriers to its adoption amongst interested parties.
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.