Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 202

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Quality Improvement Methods in Clinical Medicine

Plsek, Paul E.·1999·Pediatrics

Abstract

This article surveys the methods and tools of quality improvement used today in health care. Specifically, we describe how clinicians can use these methods to impact the clinical practice of medicine. Improvement teams from a variety of health care organizations have reported the successful use of basic methods such as group work, flowcharting, data collection, and graphical data analysis. In addition to these incremental, problem-solving methods borrowed from the industrial practice of improvement, we have also seen the use of specific process design methods in health care applications such as care path development. The pace of change in health care has also led to the practical development of newer methods for rapid cycle improvement. We will review the basic approach behind these methods and illustrate key elements such as the ideas of change concepts and small-scale tests of change. Unfortunately, whereas these methods have been very successful and highly appealing to improvement practitioners, they may also have inadvertently widened a gulf between these practitioners and traditional health-services and clinical researchers. We offer an assessment of this issue and suggest ways to narrow the communication gap. Measurement has also traditionally been a part of the thinking about quality assurance and improvement in health care. We review the new philosophy of measurement that has emerged from recent improvement thinking and describe the use of control charts in clinical improvement. Benchmarking and multiorganizational collaboratives are more recent innovations in the ways we approach improvement in health care. These efforts go beyond simple measurement and explore the why and how associated with the widespread variation in performance in health care. We explore a variety of health care examples to illustrate these methods and the lessons learned in their use. We conclude the article with an overview of four habits that we believe are essential for health care organizations and individual clinicians to adopt to bring about real improvement in the clinical practice of medicine. These are the habits for: 1) viewing clinical practice as a process; 2) evidence-based practice; 3) collaborative learning; and 4) change.

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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1542/peds.103.se1.203

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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

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

See all 202

Metadata

Authors
Plsek, P. E.
Venue
Pediatrics
Published
1999-01-01
Volume
103
Issue
Supplement_E1
Pages
203-214
ISSN
  • 0031-4005 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-4275
OpenAlex
W1847466052
Cited by
202
References
2
FWCI
17.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Quality Improvement Methods in Clinical Medicine. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1542/peds.103.se1.203
The paper
Plsek, P. E. (1999). Quality Improvement Methods in Clinical Medicine. Pediatrics. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.103.se1.203

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.