ArticleBMJ paediatrics open2022
Instruments to evaluate hospitalised children parents' satisfaction with nursing care: a scoping review.
Article in BMJ paediatrics open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Nursing Interventions to Promote Health Literacy in Children and Adolescents: A Scoping Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Effects of evidence-based nursing intervention on pain control and venipuncture quality in pediatric patients undergoing intravenous infusion: a retrospective study.American journal of translational research · 2026Article
- The parent-doctor-child triangle: a structural equation modeling-based study in pediatric outpatient clinics in Indonesia.Child health nursing research · 2025Article
- Assessing child satisfaction and expectations for developing a child-friendly environment at the pediatric department in a general hospital in Qatar.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo identify instruments that allow the evaluation of parent's satisfaction regarding nursing care during their child hospitalisation.
methodsA review was performed using Preferred Reporting Items for Scoping Reviews. The study was prospectively registered in Open Science Framework. Research was carried out on EBSCOhost, PubMed, SciELO, Web of Science and ScienceDirect platforms as well as grey literature. Additionally, the references of selected articles were also examined.
resultsA sample of 65 articles allowed the identifications of 38 distinctive instruments to evaluate parents' satisfaction in different hospital settings. Most studies were applied in paediatric wards (n=28), followed by neonatal intensive care units (n=21), paediatric intensive care units (n=9) and emergency departments (n=7). Sample size ranged from 13 to 3354 and 3 studies used mixed methods, 20 were methodological studies of instruments construction or validation and 43 were quantitative studies. 21 different instruments previously existent were found. In 3 studies, adapted instruments were used and, in 14 studies, structured instruments were purposively designed for the study. Instruments had between 1 and 13 domains and total number of items ranged between 13 and 92. Most studies assessed overall satisfaction (n=53) and instrument reliability (n=49) and/or validity (n=37).
conclusionMost instruments consider nursing care as a domain of satisfaction. Only two instruments focused specifically on nursing care. In most of the studies, there was a concern to evaluate instruments psychometric properties. This review clearly shows that there is still a gap in the literature on the range of aspects that influence satisfaction and a lack of consensus on ideal conditions for instrument use and application.
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.