Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23614706›Full record

ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2015

Expect the unexpected: patients' and families' expectations and experiences of new clinical procedures.

Kathryn Ehrich, Luke Cowie, Jane Sandall

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Fragility, uncertainty, and healthcare.Theoretical medicine and bioethics · 2016
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Kathryn EhrichWomen's Health Academic Centre, King's College London, UK.
Luke CowieInstitute of Primary Care & Public Health, Cardiff University School of Medicine, Cardiff, UK.
Jane SandallWomen's Health, Division of Women's Health, King's College London, Women's Health Academic Centre, King's Health Partners, North Wing, St. Thomas' Hospital, London, UK.

Funding

Department of Health
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEarly stage clinical innovation often occurs 'under the radar' of governance systems for established procedures. Previously impossible or unavailable techniques still being developed involve additional uncertainty and unknown risks and benefits compared with standard procedures. Patient and family expectations, perceptions and experiences of these new procedures and their possible impacts on aspects of patient safety are under-researched.

objectiveTo explore patient and family expectations and experiences of undergoing new clinical procedures.

settingA large UK Hospital NHS Foundation Trust with a range of clinically innovative specialties.

methodsWe interviewed 15 patients who received new clinical procedures in a variety of medical and surgical specialties. Qualitative interviews were used to facilitate in-depth exploration of patient and family views and experiences. Topics included patient and family access to and expectations of the procedure, informed decision making regarding acceptance of new procedures and post-procedure experiences.

resultsSome patients sought out specific interventions, while others accepted new treatment options that clinicians proposed. Most participants reported that explanations about the procedure and risks were clear, and there were opportunities to ask questions prior to the procedure. Most participants also regarded their procedures as successful. However, post-procedure information follow-up was often reported as lacking and some outcomes were considerably problematic and raised patient safety issues. DISCUSSION: The importance of patients' and family views in evaluating health care are increasingly recognized. We discuss the implications of our findings for informed decision making and post-intervention follow-up.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CareFamilyPatient SatisfactionTherapies, InvestigationalDecision MakingHumansInterviews as TopicPatient SafetyUnited Kingdominnovationnew clinical procedurespatient involvementpatient safety

Identifiers

PMID23614706
PMCPMC5060887

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.