scholarly journals Improving Diabetes Care in Rural Areas: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Quality Improvement Interventions in OECD Countries

PLoS ONE ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 8 (12) ◽  
pp. e84464 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ignacio Ricci-Cabello ◽  
Isabel Ruiz-Perez ◽  
Antonio Rojas-García ◽  
Guadalupe Pastor ◽  
Daniela C. Gonçalves
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pei Chen Wu ◽  
Lyn McPherson ◽  
Stephen B Lambert ◽  
Peter Wnukowski-Mtonga ◽  
Nicholas G Lennox ◽  
...  

ABSTRACTBackgroundInfluenza is a major contributor to global disease burden. Vaccination recommendations specifically target populations at increased risk of serious influenza sequelae. The aim of this study is to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness of different quality improvement interventions to increase vaccination rates in high-risk populations.MethodsRandomized and nonrandomized studies with concurrent control groups will be identified. Interventions to increase vaccination rates will be categorized by strategy type. Overall intervention effects will be calculated using random effects models. Study quality will be assessed using a modified Cochrane Risk of Bias tool.


2012 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 570-577 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oluwakemi A. Fawole ◽  
Sydney M. Dy ◽  
Renee F. Wilson ◽  
Brandyn D. Lau ◽  
Kathryn A. Martinez ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Alan D Rogers ◽  
David L Wallace ◽  
Robert Cartotto

Abstract Quality improvement interventions (QIIs) are intended to improve the care of patients. Unlike most traditional clinical research, these endeavors emphasize the sustainable implementation of scientific evidence rather than the establishment of evidence. Our purpose was to conduct a systematic review of QII publications in the field of burn care. A systematic review was conducted utilizing electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library) of all studies relating to “quality improvement” in burn care published until March 31, 2020. Studies were excluded if no baseline data were reported, or if no intervention was applied and tested. Studies were scored using a novel 10-point evaluation system for QII. We evaluated 414 studies involving “quality improvement” in burn care. Only 82 studies contained a QII while 332 studies were categorized as traditional research. Several traditional research studies made claims to be QIIs, but few met the criteria. Of the 82 QII references, only 20 (24%) were accessible as full-text manuscripts, the remainder were published as abstracts only. The mean score was 7.95 for full-text studies (range 6–10) and 7.4 for abstract-only studies (range 5.5–9.5). Despite the importance of quality improvement (QI) in burn care, very few studies have been published that employ true QI methodology, and many QII studies never advance beyond publication as abstracts in conference proceedings. Based on this systematic review, we propose guidelines to improve the quality of QII submissions.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document