ArticlePatient preference and adherence2022
The Ward Round: Patients' Perceptions of a Patient-Centered Approach and Their Suggestions for Improved Participation.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Research on the application of scenario-based simulation ward rounds combined with video feedback method in standardized residency training of gastroenterology.BMC medical education · 2026Trial
- Article
- Effect of SMS Ward Round Notifications on Inpatient Experience in Acute Medical Settings: Retrospective Cohort Study.JMIR human factors · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To explore, through a learning activity for healthcare students, how patients perceived the ward round and its patient-centered approach. Patients and Methods: Patients admitted for elective orthopedic surgery were invited to participate in the study, which involved answering a survey comprising seven intersectional questions and eight free text questions. In addition, medical and nursing students did semi-structured interviews with the patients, covering the same free text questions. Twenty-three patients answered the survey, of whom fifteen also completed the interviews. The results from the interviews were explored using a thematic content analysis. Results: Forty-three percent (10/23) of the patients strongly agreed or agreed that their knowledge of patient-centered ward round was sufficient to be able to participate actively, and thirty percent (7/23) indicated they had good knowledge of the laws and regulations governing the care of patients. Most of the patients felt satisfied with how their own and their relatives' experiences were taken into account. The categories information and to be listened to were mentioned repeatedly by patients as priorities for patient-centered ward rounds. The interview analysis revealed four main categories: preparation, communication, organization, and safety as important and in need of improvement. Conclusion: Less than half of the patients surveyed felt they could participate in the ward round, which indicates that there is an opportunity for improvement and development. Better information and communication about legal rights, as well as about the structure and content of the ward round, could be valuable to patients before admission. It is also important to find a way for patients' individual wishes to be more fully and easily conveyed to medical staff. Creating a more tailor-made ward round for each patient and fulfilling a patient-centered approach will likely entail a substantial organizational and mental shift.
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.