ArticleBMC health services research2025
A multiple criteria framework for value-based assessment of health care services applied to a radiology case.
Article in BMC health services research, 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Traditionally, value-based health care assessment initiatives have: (1) not explicitly evaluated value; (2) been complex (which limits reproducibility) and not admitted customization; and 4) not operationalized value in a way that addresses the concerns of the involved stakeholders. This research developed a four-step framework for value-based assessment of health care services that aims to overcome these limitations. The development of the framework was supported by a case study conducted in the radiology department of the second largest general hospital in Portugal and involved the participation of administrators, physicians, radiographers, and patients, and incorporates several Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis methods. A set of 160 indicators to assess the value of radiology departments was identified in the literature and synthesized into 7 value-assessment dimensions. The framework considers specific indicators for each stakeholder type and suggests customizable ways to determine the benefit of the service. Additionally, we determined the value of the radiology department (considering benefits perceived by stakeholders and direct clinical costs) and propose a dashboard to monitor its evolution. The developed management tool enables an explicit valuation of the department and uncovers service features that need to be improved. If its use is continued, it will report the evolution of the department. The framework can easily be adapted to other hospitals or departments or be used by researchers as a basis for the development of other models.
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.