Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2022 Oct 4;11(2):e31055.
doi: 10.2196/31055.

Trends in Health Quality-Related Publications Over the Past Three Decades: Systematic Review

Joseph Mendlovic #  1 , Francis B Mimouni #  1 , Iris Arad  1 , Eyal Heiman #  1
Affiliations
Review

Trends in Health Quality-Related Publications Over the Past Three Decades: Systematic Review

Joseph Mendlovic et al. Interact J Med Res. .

Abstract

Background: Quality assessment in health care is a process of planned activities with the ultimate goal of achieving a continuous improvement of medical care through the evaluation of structure, process, and outcome measures. Physicians and health care specialists involved with quality issues are faced with an enormous and nearly always increasing amount of literature to read and integrate. Nevertheless, the novelty and quality of these articles (in terms of evidence-based medicine) has not been systematically assessed and described.

Objective: The objective of this study was to test the hypothesis that the number of high-evidence journal articles (according to the pyramid of evidence), such as randomized control trials, systematic reviews, and ultimately, practice guidelines, increases over time, relative to lower-evidence journal articles, such as editorials, reviews, and letters to the editors.

Methods: We used PubMed database to retrieve relevant articles published during the 31-year period between January 1, 1989, and December 31, 2021. The search was conducted in April 2022. We used the keywords "quality care," "quality management," "quality indicators," and "quality improvement" and limited the search fields to title and abstract in order to limit our search results to articles nearly exclusively related to health care quality.

Results: During this 31-year evaluation period, there was a significant cubic increase in the total number of publications, reviews, clinical trials (peaking in 2017, with a sharp decline until 2021), controlled trials (peaking in 2016, with a sharp drop until 2021), randomized controlled trials (peaking in 2017, with a sharp drop until 2021), systematic reviews (nearly nonexistent in the 1980s through 1990s to a peak of 222 in 2021), and meta-analyses (from nearly none in the 1980s through 1990s to a peak of approximately 40 per year in 2020). There was a linear increase in practice guidelines from none during 1989-1991 to approximately 25 per year during 2019-2021, including a cubic increase in editorials, peaking in 2021 at 125 per year, and in letters to the editor, peaking at 50-78 per year in the last 4 years (ie, 2018-2021).

Conclusions: Over the past 31 years, the field of quality in health care has seen a significant yearly increase of published original studies with a relative stagnation since 2015. We suggest that contributors to this dynamic field of research should focus on producing more evidence-based publications and guidelines.

Keywords: health quality; healthcare quality; medline; publication; quality assessmnet.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Total yearly number of publications (y-axis) versus year of publication (x-axis).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Yearly number of reviews (y-axis) versus year of publication (x-axis).
Figure 3
Figure 3
Yearly number of clinical trials (y-axis) versus year of publication (x-axis).
Figure 4
Figure 4
Yearly number of controlled trials (y-axis) versus year of publication (x-axis).
Figure 5
Figure 5
Yearly number of randomized controlled trials (y-axis) versus year of publication (x-axis). RCT: randomized controlled trial.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Number of Systematic reviews (y-axis) per year (x-axis).
Figure 7
Figure 7
Number of Meta-analyses (y-axis) per year (x-axis).
Figure 8
Figure 8
Number of practice guidelines (y-axis) per year (x-axis).
Figure 9
Figure 9
Number of editorials (y-axis) per year (x-axis).
Figure 10
Figure 10
Yearly number of Letters to the editor (y-axis) versus Year of Publication (x-axis).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

  • The future of Cochrane Neonatal.
    Soll RF, Ovelman C, McGuire W. Soll RF, et al. Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12. Early Hum Dev. 2020. PMID: 33036834
  • Beyond the black stump: rapid reviews of health research issues affecting regional, rural and remote Australia.
    Osborne SR, Alston LV, Bolton KA, Whelan J, Reeve E, Wong Shee A, Browne J, Walker T, Versace VL, Allender S, Nichols M, Backholer K, Goodwin N, Lewis S, Dalton H, Prael G, Curtin M, Brooks R, Verdon S, Crockett J, Hodgins G, Walsh S, Lyle DM, Thompson SC, Browne LJ, Knight S, Pit SW, Jones M, Gillam MH, Leach MJ, Gonzalez-Chica DA, Muyambi K, Eshetie T, Tran K, May E, Lieschke G, Parker V, Smith A, Hayes C, Dunlop AJ, Rajappa H, White R, Oakley P, Holliday S. Osborne SR, et al. Med J Aust. 2020 Dec;213 Suppl 11:S3-S32.e1. doi: 10.5694/mja2.50881. Med J Aust. 2020. PMID: 33314144
  • Secular trends in impact factor of breastfeeding research publications over a 20-year period.
    Marom R, Lubetzky R, Mimouni FB, Ovental A, Mandel D, Cohen S. Marom R, et al. Breastfeed Med. 2014 Mar;9(2):98-100. doi: 10.1089/bfm.2013.0090. Epub 2013 Nov 27. Breastfeed Med. 2014. PMID: 24283959 Free PMC article. Review.
  • Temporal trends in inflammatory bowel disease publications over a 19-years period.
    Weintraub Y, Mimouni FB, Cohen S. Weintraub Y, et al. World J Gastroenterol. 2014 Nov 28;20(44):16745-9. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v20.i44.16745. World J Gastroenterol. 2014. PMID: 25469047 Free PMC article. Review.
  • Updating Systematic Reviews.
    Shojania KG, Sampson M, Ansari MT, Ji J, Garritty C, Rader T, Moher D. Shojania KG, et al. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2007 Sep. Report No.: 07-0087. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2007 Sep. Report No.: 07-0087. PMID: 20734512 Free Books & Documents. Review.
See all similar articles

References

    1. Donabedian Avedis. Quality assessment and monitoring: retrospect and prospect. Eval Health Prof. 1983 Sep;6(3):363–75. doi: 10.1177/016327878300600309. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Blumenthal David. Part 1: Quality of care--what is it? N Engl J Med. 1996 Sep 19;335(12):891–4. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199609193351213. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Brook Robert, McGlynn Elizabeth, Shekelle Paul. Defining and measuring quality of care: a perspective from US researchers. Int J Qual Health Care. 2000;12(4):295. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/12.4.281. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Jeffer Edward. Quality assurance and quality improvement: the 1990s and beyond. J Health Qual. 1992;14(3):40. doi: 10.1111/j.1945-1474.1992.tb00035.x. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Mansoor Ibrahim. The medical uses of Internet and how to stay current with Internet. J Family Community Med. 2002;9(1):64. - PMC - PubMed