ArticleFrontiers in public health2026
Developing sensitive quality indicators for ground inter-hospital transport of adult critically ill patients using Donabedian model.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The complexity of inter-hospital transport (IHT) for critically ill patients poses challenges to quality evaluation. Currently, sensitive quality indicators for the entire process of IHT remain lacking. The objective of this study is to develop a set of standardized and quantifiable quality evaluation indicators for land-based IHT of adult critically ill patients. Methods: Based on the structure-process-outcome three-dimensional model, we developed the first-round Delphi questionnaire through literature review, semi-structured interviews, and research group discussions. We invited nursing, medical, and administrative experts in emergency medicine, critical care, and IHT from various institutions to participate in two rounds of Delphi consultation, and established the quality evaluation indicator system for IHT. The indicator weights were determined using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). Results: The response rates for the two rounds of the expert Delphi questionnaire were 100 and 95.83%, respectively. The proportion of experts providing suggestions was 83.3% in the first round and 21.7% in the second round. The expert authority coefficient ( Conclusion: The sensitive quality indicators for land-based IHT of adult critically ill patients developed in this study enable comprehensive quality monitoring of the entire transfer process through the dimensions of structure, process, and outcome. Those quality indicators provide a basis for objectively evaluating the quality of IHT, identifying weaknesses in transport practice, and improving transport quality.
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.