Quality Indicators in the Clinical Specialty of Urology: A Systematic Review

Key performance indicators for pharmaceutical services: A systematic review

“…This specific study presented a comprehensive account of the methodology employed in developing indicators. This is consistent with findings from other systematic reviews that employed the AIRE tool, wherein either none 31 or only a minimal 6.6% 28 of the included studies reached a cumulative score of 50% on the tool across the four domains. Other reviews also revealed poor reporting of the methods used for developing quality indicators that complicated the assessment of the methodological rigor and quality of the studies.…”

“…27 Prior systematic reviews of quality indicators use the same instrument. 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 The AIRE instrument consists of four domains (1. purpose, relevance, and organizational context, 2. stakeholder involvement, 3. scientific evidence, and 4. additional evidence, formulation, and usage) subdivided into 20 items which are listed in Supplementary Data S2. Each item is scored on a 4-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree or no information provided, 2 = disagree, 3 = agree, 4 = strongly agree).…”