ArticleJournal of advanced nursing2014
Developing a pressure ulcer risk factor minimum data set and risk assessment framework.
Article in Journal of advanced nursing, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Skin hydration measurement and the prediction of the early development of pressure ulcers among at risk adults: A systematic review.International wound journal · 2023Pooled it
- Roles, Barriers and Facilitators of Multidisciplinary Teams Supporting People With Stage 3 and 4 Pressure Injuries in Hospital and Home Settings: A Scoping Review.International wound journal · 2026Article
- The impact of a risk assessment tool on hospital pressure injury prevalence and prevention: a quantitative pre-post evaluation.International journal of nursing studies advances · 2025Article
- Determining the required data elements to develop the information management system for Iranian traditional medicine.BMC complementary medicine and therapies · 2025Article
- Improving pressure injury risk assessment using real-world data from skilled nursing facilities: A cohort study.International wound journal · 2024Article
- Application of enhanced recovery after surgery following liver transplantation.World journal of surgical oncology · 2023Article
- Optimization of Spatial and Temporal Configuration of a Pressure Sensing Array to Predict Posture and Mobility in Lying.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Article
- Feasibility of PURPOSE T in clinical practice and patient participation-A mixed-method study.International wound journal · 2023Article
- Using consensus methods to prioritize modifiable risk factors for development of manifestations of frailty in hospitalized older adults.Nursing open · 2023Article
- Relationship between predisposing and facilitating factors: Does it influence the risk of developing peri-operative pressure injuries?International wound journal · 2022Article
- Risk factors and the potential of nomogram for predicting hospital-acquired pressure injuries.International wound journal · 2020Article
- Pressure Relieving Support Surfaces for Pressure Ulcer Prevention (PRESSURE 2): Clinical and Health Economic Results of a Randomised Controlled Trial.EClinicalMedicine · 2019Article
- Prevalence and Risk Factors for Pressure Ulcers in Patients with Enterocutaneous Fistula: A Retrospective Single-Center Study in China.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2019Article
- Clinical evaluation of a new pressure ulcer risk assessment instrument, the Pressure Ulcer Risk Primary or Secondary Evaluation Tool (PURPOSE T).Journal of advanced nursing · 2018Article
- Exploration of pressure ulcer and related skin problems across the spectrum of health care settings in Ontario using administrative data.International wound journal · 2017Article
- Using cognitive pre-testing methods in the development of a new evidenced-based pressure ulcer risk assessment instrument.BMC medical research methodology · 2016Article
- A new pressure ulcer conceptual framework.Journal of advanced nursing · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimTo agree a draft pressure ulcer risk factor Minimum Data Set to underpin the development of a new evidenced-based Risk Assessment Framework.
backgroundA recent systematic review identified the need for a pressure ulcer risk factor Minimum Data Set and development and validation of an evidenced-based pressure ulcer Risk Assessment Framework. This was undertaken through the Pressure UlceR Programme Of reSEarch (RP-PG-0407-10056), funded by the National Institute for Health Research and incorporates five phases. This article reports phase two, a consensus study.
designConsensus study.
methodA modified nominal group technique based on the Research and Development/University of California at Los Angeles appropriateness method. This incorporated an expert group, review of the evidence and the views of a Patient and Public Involvement service user group. Data were collected December 2010-December 2011.
findingsThe risk factors and assessment items of the Minimum Data Set (including immobility, pressure ulcer and skin status, perfusion, diabetes, skin moisture, sensory perception and nutrition) were agreed. In addition, a draft Risk Assessment Framework incorporating all Minimum Data Set items was developed, comprising a two stage assessment process (screening and detailed full assessment) and decision pathways.
conclusionThe draft Risk Assessment Framework will undergo further design and pre-testing with clinical nurses to assess and improve its usability. It will then be evaluated in clinical practice to assess its validity and reliability. The Minimum Data Set could be used in future for large scale risk factor studies informing refinement of the Risk Assessment Framework.
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.