The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Assessing the Impact of Continuous Quality Improvement on Clinical Practice: What It Will Take to Accelerate Progress
Open accessAbstract
The literature on continuous quality improvement (CQI) has produced some evidence, based on nonrandomized studies, that its clinical application can improve outcomes of care while reducing costs. Its effectiveness is enhanced by a nucleus of physician involvement, individual practitioner feedback, and a supportive organizational culture. The few randomized studies, however, suggest no impact of CQI on clinical outcomes and no evidence to date of organization‐wide improvement in clinical performance. Further, most studies address misuse issues and avoid examining overuse or underuse of services. The clinical application of CQI is more likely to have a pervasive impact when it takes place within a supportive regulatory and competitive environment, when it is aligned with financial incentives, and when it is under the direction of an organizational leadership that is committed to integrating all aspects of the work.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
From best evidence to best practice: effective implementation of change in patients' care
Grol, R., & Grimshaw, J. (2003) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(03)14546-1 · Cited by 4,531
(2001) · PubMed · Cited by 1,709
Ferlie, E. B., & Shortell, S. M. (2001) · The Milbank Quarterly · doi:10.1111/1468-0009.00206 · Cited by 1,335
Self-citationPlanning and Studying Improvement in Patient Care: The Use of Theoretical Perspectives
GROL, R. P. T. M., BOSCH, M. C., HULSCHER, M. E. J. L., ECCLES, M. P., & WENSING, M. (2007) · The Milbank Quarterly · doi:10.1111/j.1468-0009.2007.00478.x · Cited by 943
Weiner, B. J., Amick, H., & Lee, S.-Y. D. (2008) · Medical Care Research and Review · doi:10.1177/1077558708317802 · Cited by 786
Donovan, J., Little, P., Mills, N., Smith, M., Brindle, L., Jacoby, A., Peters, T., Frankel, S., Neal, D., & Hamdy, F. (2002) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.325.7367.766 · Cited by 533
Evidence‐based Management: From Theory to Practice in Health Care
Walshe, K., & Rundall, T. G. (2001) · The Milbank Quarterly · doi:10.1111/1468-0009.00214 · Cited by 532
Kiefe, C. I., Allison, J. J., Williams, O. D., Person, S. D., Weaver, M. T., & Weissman, N. W. (2001) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.285.22.2871 · Cited by 503
No going back: A review of the literature on sustaining organizational change
Buchanan, D., Fitzgerald, L., Ketley, D., Gollop, R., Jones, J. L., Lamont, S. S., Neath, A., & Whitby, E. (2005) · International Journal of Management Reviews · doi:10.1111/j.1468-2370.2005.00111.x · Cited by 475
Atun, R., de Jongh, T., Secci, F., Ohiri, K., & Adeyi, O. (2010) · Health Policy and Planning · doi:10.1093/heapol/czp055 · Cited by 427
Evidence-Based Implementation of Evidence-Based Medicine
Grol, R., & Grimshaw, J. (1999) · The Joint Commission Journal on Quality Improvement · doi:10.1016/s1070-3241(16)30464-3 · Cited by 421
Reviewing audit: barriers and facilitating factors for effective clinical audit
Johnston, G., Crombie, I. K., Alder, E. M., Davies, H. T. O., & Millard, A. (2000) · Quality in Health Care · doi:10.1136/qhc.9.1.23 · Cited by 317
Organizational Culture and Climate: Implications for Services and Interventions Research.
Hemmelgarn, A. L., Glisson, C., & James, L. R. (2006) · Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice · doi:10.1111/j.1468-2850.2006.00008.x · Cited by 307
Glisson, C., Dukes, D., & Green, P. (2006) · Child Abuse & Neglect · doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2005.12.010 · Cited by 298
Innovation in Healthcare: A Systematic Review of Recent Research
Länsisalmi, H., Kivimäki, M., Aalto, P., & Ruoranen, R. (2006) · Nursing Science Quarterly · doi:10.1177/0894318405284129 · Cited by 262
A critical look at Lean thinking in healthcare
Young, T. P., & McClean, S. I. (2008) · Quality and Safety in Health Care · doi:10.1136/qshc.2006.020131 · Cited by 255
Bridging Community Intervention and Mental Health Services Research
Wells, K., Miranda, J., Bruce, M. L., Alegria, M., & Wallerstein, N. (2004) · American Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.161.6.955 · Cited by 237
Translating what we have learned into practice
Glasgow, R. E., Goldstein, M. G., Ockene, J. K., & Pronk, N. P. (2004) · American Journal of Preventive Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2004.04.019 · Cited by 239
Evidence-Based Strategies for Implementing Guidelines in Obstetrics: A Systematic Review
Chaillet, N., Dubé, E., Dugas, M., Audibert, F., Tourigny, C., Fraser, W. D., & Dumont, A. (2006) · Obstetrics & Gynecology · doi:10.1097/01.aog.0000236434.74160.8b · Cited by 233
Pseudoinnovation: the development and spread of healthcare quality improvement methodologies
Walshe, K. (2009) · International Journal for Quality in Health Care · doi:10.1093/intqhc/mzp012 · Cited by 208
What are the most effective strategies for improving quality and safety of health care?
Scott, I. (2009) · Internal Medicine Journal · doi:10.1111/j.1445-5994.2008.01798.x · Cited by 153
Kauth, M. R., Sullivan, G., Blevins, D., Cully, J. A., Landes, R. D., Said, Q., & Teasdale, T. A. (2010) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/1748-5908-5-75 · Cited by 98
Why does primary care need more implementation research?
Foy, R., Eccles, M., & Grimshaw, J. (2001) · Family Practice · doi:10.1093/fampra/18.4.353 · Cited by 96
Finding order in heterogeneity: types of quality-improvement intervention publications
Rubenstein, L. V., Hempel, S., Farmer, M. M., Asch, S. M., Yano, E. M., Dougherty, D., & Shekelle, P. W. (2008) · Quality and Safety in Health Care · doi:10.1136/qshc.2008.028423 · Cited by 52
Metadata
- Authors
- Shortell, S. M., Bennett, C. L., & Byck, G. R.
- Venue
- The Milbank Quarterly
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1998-12
- Volume
- 76
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 593-624
- ISSN
- 0887-378X (ISSN-L)
- 1468-0009
- OpenAlex
- W2012285058
- Cited by
- 639
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 71.50
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
