Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33723857›Full record

SynthesisHealth services research2021

Staffing levels and nursing-sensitive patient outcomes: Umbrella review and qualitative study.

Kai Svane Blume, Karina Dietermann, Uta Kirchner-Heklau, Vera Winter, Steffen Fleischer, Lisa Maria Kreidl, Gabriele Meyer, Jonas Schreyögg

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Health services research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

49 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Personnel shortages and the provision of long-term care: an empirical analysis of German nursing homes.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2025
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  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

8 authors.

Kai Svane BlumeSchumpeter School of Business and Economics, University of Wuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany.
Karina DietermannHamburg Center for Health Economics, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany.
Uta Kirchner-HeklauMedical Faculty, Institute for Health and Nursing Science, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle (Saale), Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-4593-4128
Vera WinterSchumpeter School of Business and Economics, University of Wuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-7087-2400
Steffen FleischerMedical Faculty, Institute for Health and Nursing Science, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle (Saale), Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-1345-2500
Lisa Maria KreidlHamburg Center for Health Economics, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany.
Gabriele MeyerMedical Faculty, Institute for Health and Nursing Science, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle (Saale), Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-3188-2902
Jonas SchreyöggHamburg Center for Health Economics, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-8030-2161

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo derive a comprehensive list of nursing-sensitive patient outcomes (NSPOs) from published research on nurse staffing levels and from expert opinion. DATA SOURCES/STUDY

settingPublished literature reviews and their primary studies analyzing the link between nurse staffing levels and NSPOs and interviews with 16 experts on nursing care. STUDY

designUmbrella review and expert interviews. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION

methodsWe screened three electronic databases for literature reviews on the association between nurse staffing levels and NSPOs. After screening 430 potentially relevant records, we included 15 literature reviews, derived a list of 22 unique NSPOs from them, and ranked these in a systematic fashion according to the strength of evidence existing for their association with nurse staffing. We extended this list of NSPOs based on data from expert interviews. PRINCIPAL

findingsOf the 22 NSPOs discussed in the 15 included literature reviews, we rated the strength of evidence for four as high, for five as moderate, and for 13 outcomes as low. Four additional NSPOs that have not been considered in literature were identified through expert interviews.

conclusionsWe identified strong evidence for a significant association between nurse staffing levels and NSPOs. Our results may guide researchers in selecting NSPOs they might wish to prioritize in future studies. In particular, rarely studied NSPOs as well as NSPOs that were only identified through expert interviews but have not been considered in literature so far should be subject to further research.

Indexed as

HumansInterviews as TopicNursing Staff, HospitalOutcome Assessment, Health CarePatient SatisfactionPersonnel Staffing and SchedulingQualitative ResearchQuality Indicators, Health CareQuality of Health CareReview Literature as Topichealth workforcehospitalizationnursing staffpatient outcome assessmentpatient safetyquality of health caresystematic review

Identifiers

PMID33723857
PMCPMC8522577

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.