ArticleJournal of patient experience2020
Patient Reported Experience in a Pediatric Emergency Department.
Article in Journal of patient experience, 2020. 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.
- How Healthcare Professionals Perceive Emergency Pediatric Care Provision in Two Public Hospitals in Greece: A Cross-Sectional Study.Pediatric reports · 2026Article
- Patient-reported experience measures for people living with dementia: A scoping review.Dementia (London, England) · 2024Article
- A national survey of children's experiences and needs when attending Canadian pediatric emergency departments.PloS one · 2024Article
- Usability Testing of a Patient-Centered Mobile Health App for Supporting and Guiding the Pediatric Emergency Department Patient Journey: Mixed Methods Study.JMIR pediatrics and parenting · 2022Article
- Studying the Experience of Care Through Latent Class Analysis: An Application to Italian Neonatal Intensive Care Units.Journal of patient experience · 2022Article
- Improving Patient Experience Scores in a Pediatric Emergency Department.Pediatric quality & safetyArticle
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
objectivesTo describe patient-reported experience in a pediatric emergency department (ED) and determine: (1) whether there are differences between the experience children report in comparison to their parents; and (2) whether factors such as time of visit (day, evening, night) and ED census are associated with patient experience.
methodsWe conducted a prospective cross-sectional survey of children ≥8 years of age and the parents/guardians of children 0 to 17 years who visited a pediatric ED using a validated patient experience measure. The proportion of respondents for each question indicating that an aspect of their care could have been improved was calculated as problem scores for each survey item. The primary outcome was the overall problem scores for all respondents combined and for children and parents separately.
resultsA total of 237 parents and 109 children completed surveys. The areas with the highest problem scores identified by both parents and children were: having enough to do while waiting to be seen (53.5; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 48.1, 58.8) and when to restart usual activities (34.7; 95% CI: 29.7, 40.0). There were meaningful differences in problem scores between children and parents including: doctors and nurses explaining what they were doing (parents: 19; 95% CI: 14.3, 24.7, child 40.4; 95% CI: 31.2, 50.2) and privacy when examined and treated (parents: 17.3; 95% CI: 12.8, 22.9, child: 36.7; 95% CI: 27.8, 46.5).
conclusionThere are differences in reported experience between children and their parents. This highlights the importance of including children when assessing patient experience in a pediatric setting.
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.