ArticleJournal of primary care & community health
From Consensus Through Prioritization: A Delphi Method, Clinical Audit, and Analytic Hierarchy Process Framework for Quality Improvement in Primary Diabetes Care.
Article in Journal of primary care & community health. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BackgroundType 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) affects approximately 17% of adults in Qatar, making improved primary care management a national health priority. Despite established guidelines, significant gaps persist between recommended care and real-world practice, particularly in preventive and patient-centered services. To address this, a structured, data-driven quality improvement (QI) framework was implemented.MethodsWe conducted a mixed-methods, pre-implementation QI study across 31 primary health care facilities in Qatar. The three-phase approach included: (1) a Delphi consensus with 65 primary care physicians to validate 17 key performance indicators (KPIs) for T2DM care; (2) a retrospective audit of 450 adult T2DM patient records to assess adherence to each KPI; and (3) prioritization of improvement interventions using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), based on clinical impact (50%), feasibility (30%), and urgency (20%).ResultsThe Delphi panel reached unanimous consensus on all 17 KPIs (median importance rating 5/5), covering preventive care, metabolic monitoring, therapy management, and patient education. The audit revealed high adherence to laboratory-based indicators (∼82%) but low performance in preventive and patient-centered care: ASCVD risk assessment (19.6%), foot examinations (24.0%), and individualized HbA1c goal documentation (1.3%). KPI adherence varied widely across centers (e.g., foot exam rates ranged from 0% to 95.6%). AHP analysis identified five top-priority gaps accounting for 63% of total priority weight: ASCVD risk assessment (16%), foot examinations (16%), lifestyle education (12%), follow-up HbA1c testing (10%), and individualized HbA1c goal-setting(9%).ConclusionThis study highlights critical deficits in preventive and patient-centered diabetes care in primary care facilities. By integrating expert consensus, real-world performance data, and structured prioritization through the Delphi-AHP framework, we developed a robust, evidence-based model for QI planning. Importantly, involving frontline clinicians in both KPI selection and intervention prioritization fostered ownership, contextual relevance, and alignment with clinical realities. This participatory approach enhanced the credibility and feasibility of proposed interventions and laid a strong foundation for sustainable practice change.
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.