Cited by 28Health Policy Implementation ScienceHealthcare Quality and ManagementHealth Sciences Research and Education

Lessons for non-VA care delivery systems from the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Quality Enhancement Research Initiative: QUERI Series

Open access
Solberg, Leif·2009·Implementation Science

Abstract

The U.S. Veterans Health Administration (VHA) may have a very different structure and function from the organizations and practices that provide medical care to most Americans, but those organizations and practices could learn a lot from the VHA's Quality Enhancement Research Initiative (QUERI). There are at least six topics of increasing importance for implementation research where QUERI experience should be of value to other non-VHA organizations, both within and external to the United States: 1) Researcher-clinical leader partnerships for care improvement; 2) Attention to culture, capacity, leadership, and a supportive infrastructure; 3) Practical economic evaluation of quality implementation efforts; 4) Human subject protection problems; 5) Sustainability of improvements; and 6) Scale-up and spread of improvements. The articles in Implementation Science's QUERI Series provide the details of those lessons for others who are willing to invest the time to translate them into their different settings.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/1748-5908-4-9

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 26 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Solberg, L.
Affiliations
HealthPartners (US)
Corresponding author
Solberg, Leif
Venue
Implementation Science
Published
2009-02-26
Volume
4
Issue
1
Pages
9-9
ISSN
1748-5908 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2158034376
Cited by
28
References
26
Citations by year
2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 3
FWCI
6.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Implementation Science (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Healthcare Quality and Management
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Sciences Research and Education
Keywords
Veterans Health Administration, implementation research, leadership, research participant protection, sustainability of quality improvement, quality improvement

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