ArticleBMJ (Clinical research ed.)1995
Development of review criteria: linking guidelines and assessment of quality.
Article in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 1995. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
22 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Benchmarking Performance in Pancreatic Surgery: a Systematic Review of Published Quality Metrics.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2021Pooled it
- Approaches of integrating the development of guidelines and quality indicators: a systematic review.BMC health services research · 2020Pooled it
- Reporting standards for guideline-based performance measures.Implementation science : IS · 2016Pooled it
- Methods for the guideline-based development of quality indicators--a systematic review.Implementation science : IS · 2012Pooled it
- The effect of referral templates on out-patient quality of care in a hospital setting: a cluster randomized controlled trial.BMC health services research · 2017Trial
- Clinical Audit: Improving Clinical Performance for Patient Safety.Global journal on quality and safety in healthcare · 2026Article
- Development of quality indicators for hypertension, extractable from the electronic health record of the general practitioner: a rand-modified Delphi method.BMC primary care · 2024Article
- Bacterial Contribution in Chronicity of Wounds.Microbial ecology · 2017Review
- Monitoring and assessing the quality of care for youth: developing an audit tool using an expert consensus approach.International journal of mental health systems · 2015Article
- Clinical audit, a valuable tool to improve quality of care: General methodology and applications in nephrology.World journal of nephrology · 2014Review
- Involving patients in quality indicator development - a systematic review.Patient preference and adherence · 2013Article
- Developing primary care review criteria from evidence-based guidelines: coronary heart disease as a model.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2003Article
- Characteristics of effective clinical guidelines for general practice.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2003Article
- Quality assessment for three common conditions in primary care: validity and reliability of review criteria developed by expert panels for angina, asthma and type 2 diabetes.Quality & safety in health care · 2002Article
- New Zealand and United Kingdom experiences with the RAND modified Delphi approach to producing angina and heart failure criteria for quality assessment in general practice.Quality in health care : QHC · 2000Article
- Clinical governance for diabetes in primary care: use of practice guidelines and participation in multi-practice audit.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2000Article
- Development of review criteria for assessing the quality of management of stable angina, adult asthma, and non-insulin dependent diabetes mellitus in general practice.Quality in health care : QHC · 1999Article
- Effective audit in general practice: a method for systematically developing audit protocols containing evidence-based review criteria.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 1997Article
- Assessing the quality of care. Systematic methods must be used to develop review criteria.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 1996Article
- Structured management in primary care of patients with epilepsy.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 1996Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Review criteria are designed to enable clinicians and others to assess care. However, there is no established method for developing criteria, and they are often confused with guidelines. Criteria should comprise measurable activities that are appropriate for the setting in which they are to be used. They should also be based on research evidence and prioritised according to the strength of that evidence and effect on outcome. Good criteria can be used to aid implementation of guidelines by providing a standard against which to monitor performance and enabling clinical audit.
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.