Question · asked by 1 review
'Less intense' vs routine supervision to improve the quality of primary health care: New clients gained by health facility based posts (number per quarter) Daily log completed by the supervisor reporting activities of providers
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
'Less intense' vs routine supervision to improve the quality of primary health care New clients gained by health facility based posts (number per quarter) Daily log completed by the supervisor reporting activities of providers · providers and users Managerial supervision to improve primary health care in low‐ and middle‐income countries (2011) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 247 participants | Low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Managerial supervision to improve primary health care in low‐ and middle‐income countries 2011 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.