ArticleBMC primary care2025
The development of electronic health record-extractable quality indicators for osteoporosis in primary care: A rand-modified Delphi method.
Article in BMC primary care, 2025. 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
backgroundOsteoporosis is a common chronic condition and a cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Currently, osteoporosis is under-diagnosed and under-treated. There is an important role for the general practitioner (GP) in the prevention and management of this condition. The electronic health record (EHR) can be used to effectively pinpoint at-risk patients and enhance the quality of care provided to those suffering from osteoporosis. This study aims to develop evidence-based and EHR-extractable quality indicators (QIs).
methodsThe RAND/UCLA- modified Delphi method was used. After an extensive literature search, recommendations were retrieved from the selected evidence-based guidelines and included in a questionnaire if they met the 'SMART'-criteria (specific, measurable, acceptable, realistic and time-related). Next, an expert panel (8 general practitioners, 2 patients, a geriatrician, a rheumatologist and an EHR specialist) was formed and asked to grade the selected recommendations individually. A consensus meeting was hosted to discuss the results. After their final appraisal, a set of quality indicators was developed out of the included recommendations.
resultsOut of 11 evidence-based guidelines 478 recommendations were retrieved. After applying the 'SMART' criteria, 38 recommendations were presented to the panel of experts. After the written questionnaire round and the consensus meeting 25 recommendations were included. Twenty recommendations remained after final appraisal and were converted into 34 quality indicators of which 13 are currently extractable out of the electronic health record in Belgium.
conclusionThis study generated 34 evidence-based quality indicators for osteoporosis in primary care. This set enables general practitioners to measure and enhance the quality of care for osteoporosis patients through automated audit and feedback.
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.