↓ Skip to main content

Linking clinical quality indicators to research evidence - a case study in asthma management for children

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Linking clinical quality indicators to research evidence - a case study in asthma management for children
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, July 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12913-017-2324-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Miew Keen Choong, Guy Tsafnat, Peter Hibbert, William B. Runciman, Enrico Coiera

Abstract

Clinical quality indicators are used to monitor the performance of healthcare services and should wherever possible be based on research evidence. Little is known however about the extent to which indicators in common use are based on research. The objective of this study is to measure the extent to which clinical quality indicators used in asthma management in children with outcome measurements can be linked to results in randomised controlled clinical trial (RCT) reports. This work is part of a broader research program to trial methods that improve the efficiency and accuracy of indicator development. National-level indicators for asthma management in children were extracted from the National Quality Measures Clearinghouse database and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence quality standards by two independent appraisers. Outcome measures were extracted from all published English language RCT reports for asthma management in children below the age of 12 published between 2005 and 2014. The two sets were then linked by manually mapping both to a common set of Unified Medical Language System (UMLS) concepts. The analysis identified 39 indicators and 562 full text RCTs dealing with asthma management in children. About 95% (37/39) of the indicators could be linked to RCT outcome measures. It is possible to identify relevant RCT reports for the majority of indicators used to assess the quality of asthma management in childhood. The methods reported here could be automated to more generally support assessment of candidate indicators against the research evidence.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 19 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 16%
Student > Master 3 16%
Other 2 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 5%
Student > Bachelor 1 5%
Other 4 21%
Unknown 5 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 37%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 16%
Engineering 2 11%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 4 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 March 2018.
All research outputs
#5,323,974
of 17,106,467 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#2,639
of 5,799 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#98,195
of 276,119 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#3
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,106,467 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,799 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 276,119 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.