Trial reportClinical nursing research2014
Provider staffing effect on a decision aid intervention.
Trial report in Clinical nursing research, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Supporting Mealtime Participation Among People Living With Dementia at Home: Challenges and Strategies for Caregivers.The Gerontologist · 2024Article
- Resources to Support Decision-Making Regarding End-of-Life Nutrition Care in Long-Term Care: A Scoping Review.Nutrients · 2024Article
- Decision Aid Interventions for Family Caregivers of Persons With Advanced Dementia in Decision-Making About Feeding Options: A Scoping Review.Journal of the American Medical Directors Association · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study examined the association between Nurse Practitioner (NP) and Physician Assistant (PA) staffing in nursing homes and the effect of a decision aid regarding feeding options in dementia on the frequency of surrogate-provider discussions and on surrogates' decisional conflict. We compared these outcomes for facilities that had no NPs/PAs, part-time-only NP/PA staffing, and full-time NP/PA staffing. The sample included 256 surrogate decision makers from 24 nursing homes. The decision aid was associated with significant increases in discussion rates in facilities with part-time or no NP/PA staffing (26% vs. 51%, p < .001, and 13% vs. 41%, p < .001, respectively) and decreases in decisional conflict scores (-0.08 vs. -0.047, p = .008, and -0.30 vs. -0.68, p = .014, respectively). Sites with full-time NP/PA staffing had high baseline rates of discussions (41%). These findings suggest that the decision aid and full-time NP/PA staffing can enhance surrogate decision making in nursing homes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.