Quality improvement needed in quality improvement randomised trials: Systematic review of interventions to improve care in diabetes

BMJ Open

Volumn 3, Issue 4, 2013, Pages

  Ivers, Noah M ^a   Tricco, Andrea C ^b   Taljaard, Monica ^c   Halperin, Ilana ^d   Turner, Lucy ^e   Moher, David ^e   Grimshaw, Jeremy M ^e  

^a WOMEN S COLLEGE HOSPITAL   (Canada)

^b ST MICHAEL'S HOSPITAL   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA   (Canada)

^d UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^e OTTAWA HOSPITAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DIABETES MELLITUS; DIABETIC PATIENT; FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT; FOLLOW UP; HEALTH CARE PERSONNEL; HEALTH CARE SYSTEM; HUMAN; MEDLINE; OUTPATIENT; PATIENT CARE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); RISK ASSESSMENT; SECONDARY ANALYSIS; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT; TREND STUDY;

EID: 84877712304     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20446055     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2013-002727     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Tricco AC, Ivers NM, Grimshaw JM, et al. Effectiveness of quality improvement strategies on the management of diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet 2012;379:2252-61.
2. Pildal J, Hrobjartsson A, Jorgensen KJ, et al. Impact of allocation concealment on conclusions drawn from meta-analyses of randomized trials. Int J Epidemiol 2007;36:847-57.
3. Fan E, Laupacis A, Pronovost PJ, et al. How to use an article about quality improvement. JAMA 2010;304:2279-87.
4. Higgins JP, Altman DG, Gotzsche PC, et al. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ 2011;343:d5928.
5. Falagas ME, Grigori T, Ioannidou E. A systematic review of trends in the methodological quality of randomized controlled trials in various research fields. J Clin Epidemiol 2009;62:227-31, 31 e1-9.
6. Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group. Suggested risk of bias criteria for EPOC reviews, 2012.
7. SJRSCImago Journal & Country Rank, 2007 [program].
8. Falagas ME, Kouranos VD, Arencibia-Jorge R, et al. Comparison of SCImago journal rank indicator with journal impact factor. FASEB J 2008;22:2623-8.
9. Higgins JPT, Altman DG. Assessing risk of bias in included studies. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from www.cochrane-handbook.org.
10. Hartling L, Ospina M, Liang Y, et al. Risk of bias versus quality assessment of randomised controlled trials: cross sectional study. BMJ 2009;339:b4012.
11. Ivers NM, Halperin IJ, Barnsley J, et al. Allocation techniques for balance at baseline in cluster randomized trials: a methodological review. Trials 2012;13:120.
12. Moher D, Schulz KF, Altman D, et al. The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomized trials. JAMA 2001;285:1987-91.
13. Shojania KG, Ranji SR, McDonald KM, et al. Effects of quality improvement strategies for type 2 diabetes on glycemic control: a meta-regression analysis. JAMA 2006;296:427-40.
14. Armijo-Olivo S, Stiles CR, Hagen NA, et al. Assessment of study quality for systematic reviews: a comparison of the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool and the Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment Tool: methodological research. J Eval Clin Pract 2012;18:12-18.
15. Odgaard-Jensen J, Vist GE, Timmer A, et al. Randomisation to protect against selection bias in healthcare trials. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2011;4: MR000012. doi: 10.1002/14651858.MR000012.pub3.
16. Hempel S, Suttorp MJ, Miles JNV, et al. Empirical Evidence of Associations Between Trial Quality and Effect Size [Internet]. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2011.
17. SAS 9.2 [program]: Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc., 2008.
18. Simera I, Moher D, Hirst A, et al. Transparent and accurate reporting increases reliability, utility, and impact of your research: reporting guidelines and the EQUATOR network. BMC Med 2010;8:24.
19. Davidoff F, Batalden P, Stevens D, et al. Publication guidelines for quality improvement studies in health care: evolution of the SQUIRE project. BMJ 2009;338:a3152.
20. Ivers NM, Taljaard M, Dixon S, et al. Impact of CONSORT extension for cluster randomised trials on quality of reporting and study methodology: review of random sample of 300 trials, 2000-8. BMJ 2011;343:d5886.
21. Campbell MK, Elbourne DR, Altman DG, Group C. CONSORT statement: extension to cluster randomised trials. BMJ 2004;328:702-8.
22. Michie S, Fixsen D, Grimshaw JM, et al. Specifying and reporting complex behaviour change interventions: the need for a scientific method. Implement Sci 2009;4:40.
23. Alexander JA, Hearld LR. What can we learn from quality improvement research? A critical review of research methods. Med Care Res Rev 2009;66:235-71.
24. Eccles M, Grimshaw J, Walker A, et al. Changing the behavior of healthcare professionals: the use of theory in promoting the uptake of research findings. J Clin Epidemiol 2005;58:107-12.
25. Hempel S, Rubenstein LV, Shanman RM, et al. Identifying quality improvement intervention publicationsa comparison of electronic search strategies. Implement Sci 2011;6:85.