ArticleBMJ open2019
Developing and validating an instrument to assess non-hospital health centers' preparedness to provide initial emergency care: a study protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Non-hospital healthcare center's preparedness assessment toolbar for providing basic emergency care: a sequential exploratory mixed-method study.BMC health services research · 2023Pooled it
- Child marriage in Iran: a protocol for a scoping review and meta-synthesis of qualitative evidence.BMJ open · 2026Article
- Article
- Development and Validation of a Tri-Language Questionnaire for Usability and Satisfaction of Mobile Health Applications (USHA) for Diabetes Mellitus Management.Journal of medical systems · 2026Article
- Technology-based interventions for health challenges older women face amid COVID-19: a systematic review protocol.Systematic reviews · 2022Article
- Exploring the challenges and features of implementing performance-based payment plan in hospitals: a protocol for a systematic review.Systematic reviews · 2021Article
- Preparedness of non-hospital health centers to manage patients with life-threatening emergency conditions: findings from a qualitative study.BMC health services research · 2020Article
- Psychometric properties of the Iranian version of self-care ability scale for the elderly.BMC geriatrics · 2020Article
- Comment on "Validity and Reliability of the Iranian Version of the Short Form Social Well Being Scale in a General Urban Population".Iranian journal of public health · 2020Article
- Methodological Issues on the Importance of Instrument Validation in Cross-Sectional Health Research.Bulletin of emergency and trauma · 2020Article
- Methodological issues on "challenges and opportunities towards the road of universal health coverage (UHC) in Nepal: a systematic review".Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2020Article
- How to Report Systematic Review Studies; A Critical Review of Some Methodological Issues and Recommendations to Consider When Conducting These Studies.Bulletin of emergency and trauma · 2019Article
- A Closer Look at the Validity and Reliability of the Persian Versions of National Institute of Health Stroke Scale and Modified National Institute of Health Stroke Scale in Hospitalized Patients.Galen medical journal · 2019Article
- Patients' perspectives on mobile health applications for diabetes self-management: A qualitative study in Malaysia.Digital healthArticle
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionBasic emergency management in urban and rural areas is a critical challenge. This paper presents the protocol for developing, validating and piloting an instrument to assess the preparedness of non-hospital health centres which deliver initial emergency care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study will be designed based on a sequential exploratory mixed method in two phases, in each of which there are three steps. In the first step of phase I, an extensive systematic review will be conducted. In the second step, through focus group discussions (FGDs), the experts' views on the definition of domains and items of the instrument will be compiled. In addition, semistructured interviews with the target group will be performed. Then, qualitative framework analysis will be performed. In the last step of phase I, the results of both steps will be triangulated by a panel of experts to define the domains and items to be included in the instrument. Phase II will include content validity, feasibility and reliability of the instrument. Content validity of the instrument will be assessed using modified Kappa coefficient based on clarity and relevance criteria. Feasibility of the instrument will be assessed through its implementation in 10 non-hospital health centres in Tabriz, which will be selected randomly. Reliability will be assessed in a pilot on 30 non-hospital health centres through using stratified random sampling method. Reliability of the instrument will be assessed through measuring internal consistency, test-retest reliability and inter-rater agreement. The main statistical methods for assessing reliability will include Cronbach's alpha, intraclass correlation coefficient and Kendall's tau-b. All the statistical analyses will be performed using Stata V.14. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study is approved by Tabriz University of Medical Sciences Research Ethics Committee (IR.TBZMED.REC.1397.145). The results of the study will be presented at national scientific conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals.
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.