Cargando…

Development of the Quality Improvement Minimum Quality Criteria Set (QI-MQCS): a tool for critical appraisal of quality improvement intervention publications

OBJECTIVE: Valid, reliable critical appraisal tools advance quality improvement (QI) intervention impacts by helping stakeholders identify higher quality studies. QI approaches are diverse and differ from clinical interventions. Widely used critical appraisal instruments do not take unique QI featur...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hempel, Susanne, Shekelle, Paul G, Liu, Jodi L, Sherwood Danz, Margie, Foy, Robbie, Lim, Yee-Wei, Motala, Aneesa, Rubenstein, Lisa V
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4680162/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26311020
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2014-003151
_version_ 1782405643146100736
author Hempel, Susanne
Shekelle, Paul G
Liu, Jodi L
Sherwood Danz, Margie
Foy, Robbie
Lim, Yee-Wei
Motala, Aneesa
Rubenstein, Lisa V
author_facet Hempel, Susanne
Shekelle, Paul G
Liu, Jodi L
Sherwood Danz, Margie
Foy, Robbie
Lim, Yee-Wei
Motala, Aneesa
Rubenstein, Lisa V
author_sort Hempel, Susanne
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: Valid, reliable critical appraisal tools advance quality improvement (QI) intervention impacts by helping stakeholders identify higher quality studies. QI approaches are diverse and differ from clinical interventions. Widely used critical appraisal instruments do not take unique QI features into account and existing QI tools (eg, Standards for QI Reporting Excellence) are intended for publication guidance rather than critical appraisal. This study developed and psychometrically tested a critical appraisal instrument, the QI Minimum Quality Criteria Set (QI-MQCS) for assessing QI-specific features of QI publications. METHODS: Approaches to developing the tool and ensuring validity included a literature review, in-person and online survey expert panel input, and application to empirical examples. We investigated psychometric properties in a set of diverse QI publications (N=54) by analysing reliability measures and item endorsement rates and explored sources of disagreement between reviewers. RESULTS: The QI-MQCS includes 16 content domains to evaluate QI intervention publications: Organisational Motivation, Intervention Rationale, Intervention Description, Organisational Characteristics, Implementation, Study Design, Comparator Description, Data Sources, Timing, Adherence/Fidelity, Health Outcomes, Organisational Readiness, Penetration/Reach, Sustainability, Spread and Limitations. Median inter-rater agreement for QI-MQCS items was κ 0.57 (83% agreement). Item statistics indicated sufficient ability to differentiate between publications (median quality criteria met 67%). Internal consistency measures indicated coherence without excessive conceptual overlap (absolute mean interitem correlation=0.19). The critical appraisal instrument is accompanied by a user manual detailing What to consider, Where to look and How to rate. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a ready-to-use, valid and reliable critical appraisal instrument applicable to healthcare QI intervention publications, but recognise scope for continuing refinement.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4680162
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-46801622015-12-18 Development of the Quality Improvement Minimum Quality Criteria Set (QI-MQCS): a tool for critical appraisal of quality improvement intervention publications Hempel, Susanne Shekelle, Paul G Liu, Jodi L Sherwood Danz, Margie Foy, Robbie Lim, Yee-Wei Motala, Aneesa Rubenstein, Lisa V BMJ Qual Saf Research and Reporting Methodology OBJECTIVE: Valid, reliable critical appraisal tools advance quality improvement (QI) intervention impacts by helping stakeholders identify higher quality studies. QI approaches are diverse and differ from clinical interventions. Widely used critical appraisal instruments do not take unique QI features into account and existing QI tools (eg, Standards for QI Reporting Excellence) are intended for publication guidance rather than critical appraisal. This study developed and psychometrically tested a critical appraisal instrument, the QI Minimum Quality Criteria Set (QI-MQCS) for assessing QI-specific features of QI publications. METHODS: Approaches to developing the tool and ensuring validity included a literature review, in-person and online survey expert panel input, and application to empirical examples. We investigated psychometric properties in a set of diverse QI publications (N=54) by analysing reliability measures and item endorsement rates and explored sources of disagreement between reviewers. RESULTS: The QI-MQCS includes 16 content domains to evaluate QI intervention publications: Organisational Motivation, Intervention Rationale, Intervention Description, Organisational Characteristics, Implementation, Study Design, Comparator Description, Data Sources, Timing, Adherence/Fidelity, Health Outcomes, Organisational Readiness, Penetration/Reach, Sustainability, Spread and Limitations. Median inter-rater agreement for QI-MQCS items was κ 0.57 (83% agreement). Item statistics indicated sufficient ability to differentiate between publications (median quality criteria met 67%). Internal consistency measures indicated coherence without excessive conceptual overlap (absolute mean interitem correlation=0.19). The critical appraisal instrument is accompanied by a user manual detailing What to consider, Where to look and How to rate. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a ready-to-use, valid and reliable critical appraisal instrument applicable to healthcare QI intervention publications, but recognise scope for continuing refinement. BMJ Publishing Group 2015-12 2015-08-26 /pmc/articles/PMC4680162/ /pubmed/26311020 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2014-003151 Text en Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/ This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
spellingShingle Research and Reporting Methodology
Hempel, Susanne
Shekelle, Paul G
Liu, Jodi L
Sherwood Danz, Margie
Foy, Robbie
Lim, Yee-Wei
Motala, Aneesa
Rubenstein, Lisa V
Development of the Quality Improvement Minimum Quality Criteria Set (QI-MQCS): a tool for critical appraisal of quality improvement intervention publications
title Development of the Quality Improvement Minimum Quality Criteria Set (QI-MQCS): a tool for critical appraisal of quality improvement intervention publications
title_full Development of the Quality Improvement Minimum Quality Criteria Set (QI-MQCS): a tool for critical appraisal of quality improvement intervention publications
title_fullStr Development of the Quality Improvement Minimum Quality Criteria Set (QI-MQCS): a tool for critical appraisal of quality improvement intervention publications
title_full_unstemmed Development of the Quality Improvement Minimum Quality Criteria Set (QI-MQCS): a tool for critical appraisal of quality improvement intervention publications
title_short Development of the Quality Improvement Minimum Quality Criteria Set (QI-MQCS): a tool for critical appraisal of quality improvement intervention publications
title_sort development of the quality improvement minimum quality criteria set (qi-mqcs): a tool for critical appraisal of quality improvement intervention publications
topic Research and Reporting Methodology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4680162/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26311020
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2014-003151
work_keys_str_mv AT hempelsusanne developmentofthequalityimprovementminimumqualitycriteriasetqimqcsatoolforcriticalappraisalofqualityimprovementinterventionpublications
AT shekellepaulg developmentofthequalityimprovementminimumqualitycriteriasetqimqcsatoolforcriticalappraisalofqualityimprovementinterventionpublications
AT liujodil developmentofthequalityimprovementminimumqualitycriteriasetqimqcsatoolforcriticalappraisalofqualityimprovementinterventionpublications
AT sherwooddanzmargie developmentofthequalityimprovementminimumqualitycriteriasetqimqcsatoolforcriticalappraisalofqualityimprovementinterventionpublications
AT foyrobbie developmentofthequalityimprovementminimumqualitycriteriasetqimqcsatoolforcriticalappraisalofqualityimprovementinterventionpublications
AT limyeewei developmentofthequalityimprovementminimumqualitycriteriasetqimqcsatoolforcriticalappraisalofqualityimprovementinterventionpublications
AT motalaaneesa developmentofthequalityimprovementminimumqualitycriteriasetqimqcsatoolforcriticalappraisalofqualityimprovementinterventionpublications
AT rubensteinlisav developmentofthequalityimprovementminimumqualitycriteriasetqimqcsatoolforcriticalappraisalofqualityimprovementinterventionpublications