ArticleHealth care science2026
Performance Measurement for Surgery at National Level in China.
Article in Health care science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Performance Measurement for Surgery at National Level in China.Health care science · 2026Article
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
Background: Performance assessment is the first step to improve the quality of surgery. To date, no studies have systematically evaluated the surgical performance measures in China. This study aims to investigate the performance measures in surgical care at national level in China, with the objective of identifying existing gaps and potential opportunities in performance measurement of surgical care. Methods: We summarized and evaluated surgery related performance measures from five officially published performance evaluation indicator systems in China, and compared with those endorsed by National Quality Forum (NQF), the clearing house for all federal performance measures in the United States. The evaluation and comparison include: (1) the process of measure development; (2) the characteristics of the measures, including stewards, Donabedian frames, risk adjustment, and so on; (3) the keywords of the measures using word cloud analysis. Results: A total of 85 measures relevant to surgery were included in the analysis. Among them, the majority was outcome measures, which was similar to NQF measures (76.47% Conclusions: While China has made significant progress in the performance measures in surgery, the opportunities for improvement remain in this area, including the involvement of special societies, the establishment of an evaluation mechanism, and the implementation of risk adjustment for measures.
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.