Literature DB >> 12624857

Differentiating quality improvement from research.

Anita C Reinhardt1, Leslie N Ray.   

Abstract

Monitoring of quality of care has always been an important part of health care. Self-regulation and external standards require care providers to furnish safe environments for the patient. Similarities in methods used by quality improvement (QI) projects and clinical research have created some confusion in differentiating the two practices. This article reviews the current literature and differences between QI and research. In addition, the article identifies and discusses four criteria: intervention, risk, audience, and data source, which allow investigators to differentiate between the two practices and follow the appropriate procedures for project review. Copyright 2003, Elsevier Science (USA). All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12624857     DOI: 10.1053/apnr.2003.50000

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Appl Nurs Res        ISSN: 0897-1897            Impact factor:   2.257


  4 in total

Review 1.  A decision tool to guide the ethics review of a challenging breed of emerging genomic projects.

Authors:  Yann Joly; Derek So; Gladys Osien; Laura Crimi; Martin Bobrow; Don Chalmers; Susan E Wallace; Nikolajs Zeps; Bartha Knoppers
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2016-01-20       Impact factor: 4.246

Review 2.  Primary care practice-based research networks: working at the interface between research and quality improvement.

Authors:  James W Mold; Kevin A Peterson
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2005 May-Jun       Impact factor: 5.166

3.  Innovations in the Ethical Review of Health-Related Quality Improvement and Research: The Alberta Research Ethics Community Consensus Initiative (ARECCI).

Authors:  Brad Hagen; Maeve O'Beirne; Sunil Desai; Michael Stingl; Cathy Anne Pachnowski; Sarah Hayward
Journal:  Healthc Policy       Date:  2007-05

4.  Developing a practice-based research network by integrating quality improvement: challenges and ingredients for success.

Authors:  Laura-Mae Baldwin; Gina A Keppel; Ardis Davis; Janelle Guirguis-Blake; Rex W Force; Alfred O Berg
Journal:  Clin Transl Sci       Date:  2012-03-27       Impact factor: 4.689

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.