What is the Value and Impact of the Adaptation Process on Quality Indicators for Local Use? A Scoping Review
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background: Quality indicators (QIs) are designed for improving quality of care, but the development of QIs is resource intensive and time consuming. This study sought to describe and identify the impact and potential attributes of the adaptation process for the local use of existing QIs. Methods: EMBASE, MEDLINE, CINAHL and grey literature were searched for literature operationalizing or implementing QIs that were developed in a different jurisdiction from the place where the QIs were use. Two reviewers independently extracted and mapped data on study and participant characteristics, the adaptation process of QIs, aims and key findings of studies, from which the attributes of the adaptation process was analysed. The quality assessment was done with the SQUIRE tool.Results: Of 7704 citations identified, 10 out of 33 articles were included. All studies were assessed as high quality and most were from Europe. Our results revealed a lack of definition and conceptualization for a systematic adaptation processes in which an existing set of QIs was applied. Four out of ten studies involved a consensus process (e.g., Delphi or RAND process) to determine the suitability of QIs for local use. QIs for chronic conditions in primary and secondary settings were mostly used for adaptation. Of the ones that underwent a consensus process, 56.3 to 85.7% of original QIs were considered valid for local use, and 2 to 21.8% of proposed QIs were newly added. Combining all findings, four attributes should be included in a systematic approach of adaptation: 1) identification of areas/conditions for QIs adaptation and operationalization; 2) intermediate process with considerations of issues risen from adaptation; 3) introduction of a set of proposed QIs for local use; 4) operationalizing QIs and evaluating the applicability.Conclusion: The existing QIs, although serving as a good starting point, were poorly adapted before for use in a different jurisdiction from their origin. Adaptation of QIs under a systematic approach is critical. Therefore, we propose that a systematic adaptation approach including at least four attributes found by this study should be formulated to inform future research planning for QIs adaptation and potentially establishing a new pathway for healthcare improvement. Trial registration: PROSPERO (CRD42018096844).
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,238 | 0,542 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,008 | 0,008 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,032 | 0,038 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,005 |
| Communication savante | 0,017 | 0,018 |
| Science ouverte | 0,005 | 0,006 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,005 | 0,005 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».