ArticlePediatric quality & safety
A Framework for Building an Inclusive Quality Program in a Pediatric Heart Center.
Article in Pediatric quality & safety. 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
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Pediatric heart centers have advanced quality improvement (QI) work through registries and collaboratives, improving benchmarking and shared learning. However, institutions must also build internal, sustainable QI programs tailored to local needs. We outlined our experience in developing an inclusive QI program that provides a structured framework to drive continuous improvement. Methods: We implemented a 5-step approach: (1) cultivating an environment ready for change, (2) optimizing streams to identify improvement opportunities, (3) building systems to support initiatives, (4) promoting QI work and successes, and (5) sustaining and scaling improvements. This included engaging diverse stakeholders, streamlining data, reducing participation barriers, and applying structured project management. Proposals underwent rigorous review to ensure equitable support. Results: Between 2021 and 2025, the program supported 17 subgroups across cardiology, surgery, anesthesia, and critical care, with 60% of projects led by nonphysicians. It facilitated 21 QI consults (71% progressing to formal projects), 13 publications, more than 30 national presentations, and additional impactful unpublished work, while strengthening leadership and team expertise through QI education. System-level outcomes improved, including surgical mortality and Conclusions: An inclusive QI program enhances outcomes, and our structure underscores the value of both multidisciplinary collaboration and strategic resource use. By investing in leadership, promoting diversity, and aligning with institutional goals, heart centers can achieve sustained improvement. This framework offers a potential model for institutions seeking robust QI infrastructure.
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.