Literature DB >> 20740106

No respect: research in quality, safety, and process improvement.

Ilan S Rubinfeld1, H Mathilda Horst.   

Abstract

The need for good quality and safety research has never been more imperative, but even as we encourage and promote such work, we seem to suppress it through institutional bias and inertia. Indeed the culture of health care seems to have a love-hate relationship with quality-improvement work as a whole. In this commentary we explore some of the implications of the application of pure science standards at the sharp end of clinical practice, where the down-and-dirty street-level improvement work happens.

Entities:  

Year:  2009        PMID: 20740106      PMCID: PMC2911824          DOI: 10.7812/TPP/09-042

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Perm J        ISSN: 1552-5767


  5 in total

1.  Toward stronger evidence on quality improvement. Draft publication guidelines: the beginning of a consensus project.

Authors:  F Davidoff; P Batalden
Journal:  Qual Saf Health Care       Date:  2005-10

2.  Consensus publication guidelines: the next step in the science of quality improvement?

Authors:  R G Thomson
Journal:  Qual Saf Health Care       Date:  2005-10

3.  Broadening the view of evidence-based medicine.

Authors:  D M Berwick
Journal:  Qual Saf Health Care       Date:  2005-10

4.  The science of improvement.

Authors:  Donald M Berwick
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2008-03-12       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  Perioperative tight glycemic control: the challenge of bariatric surgery patients and the fear of hypoglycemic events.

Authors:  Bellal Joseph; Jeff Genaw; Arthur Carlin; Jack Jordan; Jean Talley; Ilan Rubinfeld
Journal:  Perm J       Date:  2007
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.