You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Does Value Stream Mapping affect the structure, process, and outcome quality in care facilities? A systematic review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Systematic Reviews, August 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13643-017-0563-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marina Nowak, Holger Pfaff, Ute Karbach |
| Abstract |
Quality improvement within health and social care facilities is needed and has to be evidence-based and patient-centered. Value Stream Mapping, a method of Lean management, aims to increase the patients' value and quality of care by a visualization and quantification of the care process. The aim of this research is to examine the effectiveness of Value Stream Mapping on structure, process, and outcome quality in care facilities. A systematic review is conducted. PubMed, EBSCOhost, including Business Source Complete, Academic Search Complete, PSYCInfo, PSYNDX, SocINDEX with Full Text, Web of Knowledge, and EMBASE ScienceDirect are searched in February 2016. All peer-reviewed papers evaluating Value Stream Mapping and published in English or German from January 2000 are included. For data synthesis, all study results are categorized into Donabedian's model of structure, process, and outcome quality. To assess and interpret the effectiveness of Value Stream Mapping, the frequencies of the results statistically examined are considered. Of the 903 articles retrieved, 22 studies fulfill the inclusion criteria. Of these, 11 studies are used to answer the research question. Value Stream Mapping has positive effects on the time dimension of process and outcome quality. It seems to reduce non-value-added time (e.g., waiting time) and length of stay. All study designs are before and after studies without control, and methodologically sophisticated studies are missing. For a final conclusion about Value Stream Mapping's effectiveness, more research with improved methodology is needed. Despite this lack of evidence, Value Stream Mapping has the potential to improve quality of care on the time dimension. The contextual influence has to be investigated to make conclusions about the relationship between different quality domains when applying Value Stream Mapping. However, for using this review's conclusion, the limitation of including heterogeneous and potentially biased results has to be considered. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 4 | 80% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 80% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 169 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 169 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 42 | 25% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 20 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 15 | 9% |
| Researcher | 11 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 5% |
| Other | 23 | 14% |
| Unknown | 50 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 25 | 15% |
| Engineering | 24 | 14% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 19 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 18 | 11% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 20 | 12% |
| Unknown | 60 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 November 2017.
All research outputs
#13,332,723
of 22,999,744 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#1,401
of 2,005 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#155,361
of 317,238 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#33
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,999,744 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,005 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.8. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 317,238 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.