ArticleBMJ open2024
Performance Understanding and Learning System (PULSE-KEY): development of a framework for implementation and performance evaluation of healthcare delivery models of care.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. 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.
- Role of the Dietitian in the Inflammatory Bowel Disease Multidisciplinary Team.Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesEfficient performance evaluation is essential for driving improvement, ensuring accountability and optimisation of outcomes in healthcare delivery. However, its complexity often leads to ineffective implementation. This article aims to advance the field of performance measurement within alternative healthcare delivery models of care through the development and validation of a comprehensive evaluation framework. DESIGN AND
participantsA seven-stage methodological approach was adapted from the Health Care Quality Indicators Project and a conceptual analysis method. The first three stages, which have been previously published, included: (1) an extensive literature review, (2) engagement with consumers and patients through interviews and a discrete choice experiment and (3) involvement of stakeholders across the healthcare system via interviews and surveys. Building on this previous work, the present study advances the framework development through four additional stages: (4) development of a conceptual framework (identifying, categorising, synthesising concepts into outcome domains), (5) expert consultation, (6) validation using a real-world case study and (7) refinement for practical applicability and effectiveness in evaluating alternative healthcare delivery models of care.
resultsThe framework was developed by synthesising insights from phases 1-3 of our previously published work and refined through consultations with 25 experts, confirming its relevance, clarity and suitability for diverse audiences. This study also details the framework's validation, refinement and finalisation process. The final framework is structured around eight primary domains, covering implementation outcomes, effectiveness, safety, patient-centredness, healthcare provider experience, access, service delivery and economic evaluation. Within the implementation outcomes domain, three subdomains-adoptability, implementability and sustainability-are further delineated, providing a comprehensive assessment.
conclusionsThe comprehensive evaluation framework developed in this study provides a vital tool for enhancing implementation and performance measurement in alternative healthcare delivery models. By integrating insights from various stakeholders, the framework promotes data-driven decisions on adopting, implementing and sustaining various healthcare delivery models. Through systematic application, this framework aims to drive tangible enhancements in patient outcomes, improve healthcare provider experiences, and optimise overall healthcare system efficiency.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.