ReviewBMJ open2022
Defining adequacy of staffing in general hospital wards: a Delphi study.
Review in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Associations Between Nurses' Perceived Adequacy of Staffing and Quality of Nursing Care and Job Enjoyment: A Multilevel Modelling Approach.Journal of advanced nursing · 2026Observational
- Enhancing work environments and reducing turnover intention: a multicenter longitudinal cohort study on differentiated nursing practices in Dutch hospitals.BMC nursing · 2025Article
- Organizational Rigidity and Demands: A Qualitative Study on Nursing Work in Complex Organizations.Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy) · 2024Article
- The Nurse Perceived Adequacy of Staffing Scale for general hospital wards: A development and psychometric validation study.International journal of nursing studies advances · 2023Article
- Comparison of patient classification systems for dimensioning nursing staff.Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da U S P · 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo gain consensus on the items that determine adequacy of shift staffing.
designThis was a three-round Delphi study to establish consensus on what defines adequacy of shift staffing in a general hospital ward. A literature review, focus group and five semistructured expert interviews were used to generate items for the Delphi study.
settingMulticentre study in The Netherlands.
participantsNurses, head nurses, nursing managers, and capacity consultants and managers working for Dutch hospitals.
resultsTwenty-six items were included in the Delphi study. One hundred and sixty-eight, 123 and 93 participants were included in the first, second and third round, respectively. After three rounds, six items were included (mostly related to direct patient care) and nine items were excluded. No consensus was reached on 12 items, including one item that was added after the first round.
conclusionsThis is the first study to specify items that determine adequacy of staffing. These items can be used to measure adequacy of staffing, which is crucial for enhancing nurse staffing methods. Further research is needed to refine the items of staffing adequacy and to further develop and psychometrically test an instrument for measuring staffing adequacy.
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.