ArticleNursing open2019
The current status of nurses-doctors collaboration in clinical decision and its outcome in Tanzania.
Article in Nursing open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Vaccination willingness, vaccine hesitancy, and estimated coverage of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine among healthcare workers in Tanzania: A call for action.Immunity, inflammation and disease · 2023Article
- Health professionals' knowledge on dengue and health facility preparedness for case detection: A cross-sectional study in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2023Article
- Capacity building among nursing and midwifery professional associations in East Africa.Global health action · 2022Article
- The management of childhood sexual abuse by midwifery, nursing and medical providers in Tanzania.Child abuse & neglect · 2021Article
- The current status of nurses-doctors collaboration in clinical decision and its outcome in Tanzania.Nursing open · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThe aim of this study was to establish the current level of collaboration between nurses and medical doctors (MDs) in the making of clinical decisions.
designDescriptive qualitative design was applied in this study.
methodsSemi-structured interviews were conducted to collect qualitative data. Contents were arranged according to their similarities, whereas content analysis was used to identify explanatory themes.
resultsNurses feel disrespected when medical doctors (MDs) ignore their opinions. The impression of lower level of education of nurses is seen as a cause to their opinions been ignored by the medical doctors. Nurses sometimes adhere to the instructions of MDs, but on other times, they carry on with their own proposed treatment. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICES: Involvement of nurses in clinical decisions will enable nurses to effectively advocate for patients.
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.