SynthesisBMJ open2022
Improving the perception of respect for and the dignity of inpatients: a systematic review.
Synthesis in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- DispatchMAS: fusing taxonomy and artificial intelligence agents for emergency medical services.BMC emergency medicine · 2026Article
- Adaptation and validation of Spanish version of the Inpatient Dignity Scale in hospitalized patients: a psychometric study.International journal of nursing studies advances · 2025Article
- Barriers to ethical treatment of patients in clinical environments: A systematic narrative review.Health science reports · 2024Article
- Ethical care in patients with Covid-19: A grounded theory.PloS one · 2024Article
- Cross-cultural adaptation of the Scale of Perception of Respect for and Maintenance of the Dignity of the Inpatient (CuPDPH) to Brazilian Portuguese and its psychometric properties-A multicenter cross-sectional study.Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2024Article
- Provider-patient experiences and HIV care utilization among people living with HIV who inject drugs in St. Petersburg, Russia.International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2023Article
- Dignity promotion in people with advanced chronic diseases: contributions for a value-based healthcare practice.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- The Experiences of Patients, Patient Companions, and care Providers with Ethical and Unethical Behaviors Toward Patients: A Qualitative Study.Iranian journal of nursing and midwifery researchArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe aim of this systematic review is to find evidence to determine which strategies are effective for improving hospitalised patients' perception of respect and dignity.
methodsA systematic review of the literature was conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 guidelines. The MEDLINE/PubMed, PsycINFO and Cochrane Library databases were searched on 9 March 2021. Observational studies, prospective studies, retrospective studies, controlled trials and randomised controlled trials with interventions focused on improving respect for patients and maintaining their dignity were included. Case reports, editorials, opinion articles, studies <10 subjects, responses/replies to authors, responses/replies to editors and review articles were excluded. The study population included inpatients at any health facility. Two evaluators assessed risk of bias according to the Cochrane Handbook of Systematic Reviews of Interventions criteria: allocation, randomisation, blinding and internal validity. The reviewers were blinded during the selection of studies as well as during the quality appraisal. Disagreements were resolved by consensus.
results2515 articles were retrieved from databases and 44 articles were included in this review. We conducted a quality appraisal of the studies (27 qualitative studies, 14 cross-sectional studies, 1 cohort study, 1 quali-quantitative study and 1 convergent parallel mixed-method study). DISCUSSION: A limitation of this study is that it may not be generalisable to all cultures. Most of the included studies are of good quality according to the quality appraisal. To improve medical and hospital care in most countries, it is necessary to improve the training of doctors and other health professionals.
conclusionMany strategies could improve the perception of respect for and the dignity of the inpatient. The lack of interventional studies in this field has led to a gap in knowledge to be filled with better designed studies and effect measurements. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021241805.
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.