ArticleBMJ open quality2026
Value operating system: a practical framework to measure outcomes-per-cost at the episode level.
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo specify a value operating system (VOS) and its executable metric-the Value Index (VI)-that expresses risk-adjusted outcomes-per-episode-cost on a 0-100 scale with 95% CIs, including transparency guardrails and equity checks, and to outline two prospective exemplars for clinical deployment.
designMethods framework with prospective service evaluation and a predefined sensitivity plan (weight-elicitation variants; alternative risk models; cost-driver decomposition and subgroup equity).
settingHospital-based integrated practice unit with hub-and-spoke pathways for sarcoma care; real-world-time data flows.
participantsAll consecutive episodes within the sarcoma care cycle eligible for routine audit (diagnosis through follow-up), without additional sampling beyond standard care.
interventions(1) Cross-cycle optimisation versus intensification of preoperative therapy using VI to compare alternative pathways; (2) causal machine learning-assisted targeting of radiotherapy, using VI to evaluate net value in treated patients compared with candidates identified through the benefit model.
main outcome measuresPrimary: VI (0-100) with 95% CIs. Secondary: component outcome and cost scores; cost-driver decomposition; data completeness/latency; subgroup equity.
resultsWe define the VOS architecture, VI formulation, uncertainty treatment and governance guardrails (prospective registration, transparency of component scores/weights, equity checks and antigaming rules). We provide operational playbooks for both exemplars, including reporting templates and a priori sensitivity analyses to ensure interpretability and comparability over time and across subgroups.
conclusionsVOS/VI deliver an auditable, episode-level value signal that links outcomes meaningful to patients with the full episode cost, enabling clinical teams to iteratively redesign pathways while maintaining stewardship. The prospective evaluations will test usability, fairness and impact on cost-drivers, supporting scale-up and value-aligned contracting.
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.