ArticleBMC health services research2021
Realist evaluation of Schwartz rounds® for enhancing the delivery of compassionate healthcare: understanding how they work, for whom, and in what contexts.
Article in BMC health services research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
23 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 37 citations in OpenAlex.
- What is the State of Organisational Compassion-Based Interventions Targeting to Improve Health Professionals' Well-Being? Results of a Systematic Review.Journal of advanced nursing · 2025Pooled it
- Care Under Pressure 2: a realist synthesis of causes and interventions to mitigate psychological ill health in nurses, midwives and paramedics.BMJ quality & safety · 2024Pooled it
- Organizational compassion in health care settings: A mixed-methods systematic review of employee experiences and outcomes and contributing organizational traits.Health care management reviewPooled it
- Article
- Navigating existential conversations about life and death with families in paediatric palliative care: a qualitative interview study with healthcare professionals.BMC palliative care · 2026Article
- Reflecting through menopause: introducing the MIRROR cycle to support reflection during the menopause transition.Journal of research in nursing : JRN · 2026Article
- Preparing the Long-Term Care Sector for Future Health Crises: A Set of Practical Pandemic Management Staffing Strategies.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Article
- Exploring factors that contribute to the successful implementation of Schwartz Rounds in higher education institutions.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Coping in crisis: a qualitative study of stress and resilience in Ontario's long-term care workforce.Frontiers in health services · 2026Article
- Strengthening team cohesion in the emergency department through a color-coded well-being check-in: are you 'ready to roll?'Internal and emergency medicine · 2025Article
- Acknowledging existential moments and meaning-making in palliative care: A hermeneutic study of physicians' experience.Palliative & supportive care · 2025Article
- Using positive deviance to enhance HIV care retention in South Africa: development of a compassion-focused program to improve the staff and patient experience.BMC global and public health · 2025Article
- Second Victim Syndrome Among Healthcare Professionals: A Systematic Review of Interventions and Outcomes.Journal of healthcare leadership · 2025Review
- Healing Pandemic Learners: A Call To Action.Journal of general internal medicine · 2025Article
- Using Positive Deviance to Enhance HIV Care Retention in South Africa: Development of a Compassion-Focused Programme to Improve the Staff and Patient Experience.Research square · 2024Article
- A hospital-wide group approach to promote open dialogues of workplace issues and staff wellbeing with Schwartz Rounds.Australasian psychiatry : bulletin of Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists · 2024Article
- "Trust people you've never worked with" - A social network visualization of teamwork, cohesion, social support, and mental health in NHS Covid personnel.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
- Moral distress in nurses in developing economies: an integrative literature review.Journal of research in nursing : JRN · 2023Article
- The Perceptions of Healthcare Staff Regarding Moral Injury and the Impact on Staff Life and Work During COVID-19: A Scoping Review of International Evidence.Journal of religion and health · 2023Article
- Value of Schwartz Rounds in promoting the emotional well-being of healthcare workers: a qualitative study.BMJ open · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHealthcare work is known to be stressful and challenging, and there are recognised links between the psychological health of staff and high-quality patient care. Schwartz Center Rounds® (Rounds) were developed to support healthcare staff to re-connect with their values through peer reflection, and to promote more compassionate patient care. Research to date has focussed on self-report surveys that measure satisfaction with Rounds but provide little analysis of how Rounds 'work' to produce their reported outcomes, how differing contexts may impact on this, nor make explicit the underlying theories in the conceptualisation and implementation of Rounds.
methodsRealist evaluation methods aimed to identify how Rounds work, for whom and in what contexts to deliver outcomes. We interviewed 97 key informants: mentors, facilitators, panellists and steering group members, using framework analysis to organise and analyse our data using realist logic. We identified mechanisms by which Rounds lead to outcomes, and contextual factors that impacted on this relationship, using formal theory to explain these findings.
resultsFour stages of Rounds were identified. We describe how, why and for whom Schwartz Rounds work through the relationships between nine partial programme theories. These include: trust safety and containment; group interaction; counter-cultural/3rd space for staff; self-disclosure; story-telling; role modelling vulnerability; contextualising patients and staff; shining a spotlight on hidden stories and roles; and reflection and resonance. There was variability in the way Rounds were run across organisations. Attendance for some staff was difficult. Rounds is likely to be a 'slow intervention' the impact of which develops over time. We identified the conditions needed for Rounds to work optimally. These contextual factors influence the intensity and therefore degree to which the key ingredients of Rounds (mechanisms) are activated along a continuum, to produce outcomes. Outcomes included: greater tolerance, empathy and compassion for self and others; increased honesty, openness, and resilience; improved teamwork and organisational change.
conclusionsWhere optimally implemented, Rounds provide staff with a safe, reflective and confidential space to talk and support one another, the consequences of which include increased empathy and compassion for colleagues and patients, and positive changes to practice.
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.