ReviewBreathe (Sheffield, England)2016
Respiratory clinical guidelines inform ward-based nurses' clinical skills and knowledge required for evidence-based care.
Review in Breathe (Sheffield, England), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Understanding Clinicians' Perceived Barriers and Facilitators to Optimal Use of Acute Oxygen Therapy in Adults.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2020Article
- Exploration of Nurses' Preventive Practices for Aspiration Pneumonia Among Poststroke Patients at a Teaching Hospital in Ghana: A Qualitative Study.SAGE open nursingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Respiratory clinical guidelines provide clinicians with evidence-based guidance for practice. Clinical guidelines also provide an opportunity to identify the knowledge and technical and non-technical skills required by respiratory ward-based registered nurses. The aim of this review was to use a systematic process to establish the core technical and non-technical skills and knowledge identified in evidence-based clinical guidelines that enable the care of hospitalised adult respiratory patients. 17 guidelines were identified in our systematic review. The quality assessment demonstrated variability in these guidelines. Common core knowledge and technical and non-technical skills were identified. These include pathophysiology, understanding of physiological measurements and monitoring, education, counselling, and ward and patient management. The knowledge and skills extracted from respiratory clinical guidelines may inform a curriculum for ward-based respiratory nursing to ensure optimal care of adult patients.
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.