Cited by 15Primary Care and Health OutcomesHealth Services Management and PolicyHealthcare Quality and Management

Person centred coordinated care: where does the QOF point us?

McShane, M., Mitchell, E.·2015·BMJ

Abstract

Martin McShane and Edward Mitchell question the validity of the Quality and Outcomes Framework and suggest how it should change in the future

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/bmj.h2540

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The IAPT initiative embedded routine outcome measurement using validated tools such as PHQ-9 and CORE and could demonstrate good outcomes that led to further funding.

    “One of these areas is the abovementioned IAPT initiative, which embedded routine outcome measurementusing validated tools such as the PHQ-9 and the Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation (CORE) -and could demonstrate good outcomes that have led to further funding into the initiative 71 .”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 20 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
McShane, M., & Mitchell, E.
Affiliations
  • NHS England (GB)
  • Warneford Hospital (GB)
Corresponding author
McShane, M.
Venue
BMJ
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2015-06-11
Volume
350
Issue
jun11 2
Pages
h2540-h2540
ISSN
1756-1833 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2222300795
Cited by
15
References
20
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2
FWCI
4.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • BMJ (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Primary Care and Health Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Services Management and Policy
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Healthcare Quality and Management
Keywords
Quality and Outcomes Framework, person-centred care, care coordination, primary care quality measurement, health policy reform
MeSH terms
Delivery of Health Care, United Kingdom, Health Services Accessibility, Humans, Primary Health Care, Reimbursement, Incentive, Patient-Centered Care, Quality Indicators, Health Care

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