ArticleBMJ open quality2026
Identifying health economic competencies for quality improvement practitioners and educators: a mixed-methods study.
Article in BMJ open quality, 2026. 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
aimTo identify health economic evaluation competencies to guide quality improvement (QI) practice and education in Ireland.
methodsA parallel mixed-methods design was used. A rapid review profiled the focus (cost containment, efficiency and/or equity) and purpose (education, assessment, health system improvement) of health economic evaluation competencies used in healthcare education and management. In parallel, surveys were sent to senior healthcare leaders (N=528) and quality and healthcare management scholars (N=286) in Ireland. These examined knowledge, skills and experiences of using health economics in managing quality and safety, and the perceived usefulness of proposed competencies. Descriptive statistics were generated. Literature and survey findings were integrated to refine the competencies.
resultsOf the few competencies available from the literature, most had a multiple focus and purpose. Yet, none were focused on equity and few were used to assess competence. Of 189 survey respondents, few had received training in health economics (25%) or been involved in measurement of healthcare costs (34%), value for money (29%) or budget impact (23%). Barriers were terminology and inadequate infrastructure for linking clinical and financial data. Most (90-95%) endorsed the usefulness of proposed competencies. These were refined to form four major competencies: (1) understand the relationship between cost and quality in healthcare, (2) assess the basic costs and outcomes of a QI initiative, (3) understand and apply cost-effectiveness analysis to QI initiatives and (4) advance capacity for improvement by applying cost-effectiveness analysis to decision-making. Each major competency had four to six sub-competencies.
conclusionHealth economic competencies should be integral to healthcare professionals' and managers' education and professional development.
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.