ReviewJournal of multimorbidity and comorbidity
The content and processes of patient-derived quality of care indicators for people living with multiple long-term conditions (MLTC): A scoping review.
Review in Journal of multimorbidity and comorbidity. 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.
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 growing prevalence of multiple long-term conditions (MLTC) poses a public health challenge. Existing quality of care (QoC) indicators are poorly suited to the needs of MLTC populations with limited clarity on how quality should be measured. This scoping review aimed to map QoC indicators for MLTC in primary care developed with patient and caregiver input, and to characterise the methods and extent of that involvement. Methods: Scoping review following the six-stage framework by Arksey and O'Malley refined by Levac et al. Searches were conducted on six databases. Studies were included if adults with two or more chronic conditions were involved. Data were charted on indicator content (name, quality domain, data sources, measurement characteristics) and development processes (methodological approaches and stakeholders involved). Where indicators were not specified, qualitative findings were synthesised to identify QoC domains and mapped to the Donabedian model and Institute of Medicine quality domains. Community partners with lived experience of MLTC were involved. Results: Twenty-five studies were included, 78 QoC indicators were identified and a further 33 quality domains were synthesised through thematic analysis. Quality was predominately measured through patient-experience surveys rather than indicators. Studies articulated quality through care processes such as care coordination, shared decision-making and holistic assessments. Outcomes focused on functional capacity, social participation and quality of life. Conclusion: Despite robust evidence on what matters to people living with MLTC, few patient-derived QoC indicators have been developed into measurable indicators. Further work is needed to co-produce indicators suitable to existing primary care settings.
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.