ArticleJournal of graduate medical education2019
Inpatient Cross-Cover Consensus Recommendations for Medical and Surgical Residents: A Delphi Analysis.
Article in Journal of graduate medical education, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Night Physician-Nurse Collaboration: Developing the Scale of Physicians' Difficulties and Exploring Related Factors in Acute Care Hospitals.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2024Article
- Competency for Japanese novice medical laboratory scientists: a Delphi method.BMC medical education · 2022Article
- The Development of a Video Intervention to Improve Senior Medical Students' Performance on Outpatient Telephone Encounters: a Delphi Analysis and Randomized Controlled Trial.Medical science educator · 2021Article
- Preparing for Medical Internship: A Case-Based Strategy to Teach Management of Common Overnight Calls to Students.MedEdPORTAL : the journal of teaching and learning resources · 2020Article
- Cross-Cover Curriculum for Senior Medical Students.MedEdPORTAL : the journal of teaching and learning resources · 2020Article
- Cross-Coverage Care at a Crossroads.Journal of graduate medical education · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundResidents regularly care for hospitalized patients for whom they are not the primary provider (cross-cover), often without guidance.
objectiveWe identified and defined components of safe cross-cover care.
methodsSixty medical and surgical faculty physicians and chief residents from the Midwest were invited to participate in a Delphi study analyzing the appropriateness of cross-covering residents evaluating patients at bedside, deferring issues to the primary team, documenting a note, contacting the attending, and communicating with nurses. The first survey was free text, and responses were categorized. In the second survey, physicians rated categorized responses based on appropriateness using a 5-point Likert scale.
resultsForty respondents (67%) completed the first survey and 30 (50%) completed the second. Responses led to 46 categories. Twenty-eight items (60%) achieved high consensus, 8 (17%) approached consensus, and 10 (22%) did not achieve consensus, with no difference based on specialty or experience. Responses with 100% consensus included: residents should evaluate a patient at bedside whenever asked by the nurse; documentation should occur for change in level of care, death, code, or rapid response team activation; and physician-nurse communication should be respectful and closed loop.
conclusionsThis regional physician panel reached consensus on 28 elements important in cross-cover care, which can be used for training and future studies.
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.