Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32924863›Full record

ReviewQualitative health research2020

Gratitude in Health Care: A Meta-narrative Review.

Giskin Day, Glenn Robert, Anne Marie Rafferty

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Qualitative health research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Giskin DayFlorence Nightingale Faculty of Nursing, Midwifery and Palliative Care, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-9901-9267
Glenn RobertFlorence Nightingale Faculty of Nursing, Midwifery and Palliative Care, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Anne Marie RaffertyFlorence Nightingale Faculty of Nursing, Midwifery and Palliative Care, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.

Funding

Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 212792/Z/18/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Research into gratitude as a significant sociological and psychological phenomenon has proliferated in the past two decades. However, there is little consensus on how it should be conceptualized or investigated empirically. We present a meta-narrative review that focuses on gratitude in health care, with an emphasis on research exploring interpersonal experiences in the context of care provision. Six meta-narratives from literatures across the humanities, sciences, and medicine are identified, contextualized, and discussed: gratitude as social capital; gifts; care ethics; benefits of gratitude; gratitude and staff well-being; and gratitude as an indicator of quality of care. Meta-narrative review was a valuable framework for making sense of theoretical antecedents and findings in this developing area of research. We conclude that greater attention needs to be given to what constitutes "evidence" in gratitude research and call for qualitative studies to better understand and shape the role and implications of gratitude in health care.

Indexed as

Health FacilitiesNarrationDelivery of Health CareHumansQualitative Researchgratitudehealth caremeta-narrative reviewpsychologyqualitative

Identifiers

PMID32924863
PMCPMC7649920

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.