Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31852676›Full record

Trial reportBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2019

Q fever-the superstition of avoiding the word "quiet" as a coping mechanism: randomised controlled non-inferiority trial.

Charlotte R Brookfield, Patrick P J Phillips, Robert J Shorten

Erratum issuedAbstract readEquivalence TrialRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. "Shh-don't say the Q-word" or do you?The British journal of oral & maxillofacial surgery · 2021
    Trial
  2. Article
  3. Friday Leukemia-a Structural Phenomenon.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2024
    Article
  4. A quiet place: The impact of the word "quiet" on clinical workload.World journal of otorhinolaryngology - head and neck surgery · 2023
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Charlotte R BrookfieldDepartment of Microbiology, Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Fulwood, Preston PR2 9HT, UK crr5@live.co.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6493-2574
Patrick P J PhillipsUCSF Centre for Tuberculosis, Department of Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6336-7024
Robert J ShortenDepartment of Microbiology, Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Fulwood, Preston PR2 9HT, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo determine the validity of the superstition that utterance of the word "quiet" in a clinical setting increases workload.

designProspective randomised controlled non-inferiority study.

settingMicrobiology department of a large teaching hospital in Lancashire, UK.

participantsTwo members of the medical microbiology team carried out the duty work on any given week day and an on-call team member on any weekend day. 29 days were assigned in which staff were to say "Today will be a quiet day" and 32 days were assigned in which staff were to refrain from saying the word "quiet" in any context.

interventionsEach day was randomly allocated to either saying "Today will be a quiet day" (intervention group) or refraining from saying the word "quiet" (control group) in any context.

main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was mean overall workload: a composite of number of clinically related telephone calls, clinically significant results, or validated results processed by the duty medical microbiology team during a 24 hour period referred to collectively as "clinical episodes." A difference of 30 clinical episodes was considered as the margin of non-inferiority. Secondary outcomes included the individual components of the primary outcome.

resultsWorkload was measured each day over a 61 day period (1 May to 30 June 2019). A mean 139.0 clinical episodes occurred on control days compared with 144.9 on days when the experimental intervention was uttered, a difference of 5.9 (95% confidence interval-12.9 to 24.7). The upper bound was less than the specified margin of 30, providing evidence for non-inferiority. No evidence of a difference in workload was found between interventions with any of the four components, whether considering unadjusted or adjusted analyses, or looking at the subgroups of week days or weekends.

conclusionsThe study findings refute the long held superstition that utterance of the word "quiet" impacts on clinical workload, and therefore it should not be avoided. In the era of considerable staff shortages and increased work related stress, doctors should look to other methods to increase resilience and protect their wellbeing and mental health.

trial registrationLancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust's research department SE-259.

Indexed as

Adaptation, PsychologicalAdultFemaleHealth PersonnelHumansLanguageMaleProspective StudiesSuperstitionsWorkloadWorkplace

Identifiers

PMID31852676
PMCPMC7190014

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.