ArticleHealth services research2023
Evaluation of a protocol for eliciting narrative accounts of pediatric inpatient experiences of care.
Article in Health services research, 2023. 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.
- Improving Diagnosis: Evaluation of Diagnostic Experiences Classified as Problems, Mistakes, or Both by Patients and Care Partners From a Nationally Representative Survey.Medical care · 2026Article
- Doctor-child communication and caregivers' willingness to recommend hospital: a secondary analysis using pediatric patient experience data.Translational pediatrics · 2026Article
- Parents Have More to Say: Comments From the Child HCAHPS Single Question Versus a Narrative Item Set.Hospital pediatrics · 2023Article
- Evaluation of a protocol for eliciting narrative accounts of pediatric inpatient experiences of care.Health services research · 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the measurement properties of a set of six items designed to elicit narrative accounts of pediatric inpatient experience. DATA SOURCES: Data came from 163 participants recruited from a probability-based online panel of U.S. adults. Participants were family members of a child who had an overnight hospital stay in the past 12 months. STUDY
designCross-sectional survey with follow-up phone interviews. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION
methodsParticipants completed an online (n = 129) or phone (n = 34) survey about their child's hospitalization experience. The survey contained closed-ended items from the Child Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (Child HCAHPS) survey, followed by the six narrative items. Approximately 2 weeks after completing the survey, 47 participants additionally completed a one-hour, semi-structured phone interview, the results of which served as a "gold standard" for evaluating the fidelity of narrative responses. Qualitative content analysis was used to code narrative and interview responses for domains of patient experience and actionability. PRINCIPAL
findingsThe average narrative was 248 words (SD = 319). Seventy-nine percent of narratives mentioned a topic included in the Child HCAHPS survey; 89% mentioned a topic not covered by that survey; and 75% included at least one detailed description of an actionable event. Overall, there was 66% correspondence between narrative and interview responses. Correspondence was higher on the phone than in the online condition (75% vs. 59%).
conclusionsNarratives elicited from rigorously designed multi-item sets can provide detailed, substantive information about pediatric inpatient experiences that hospitals could use to improve child and family experiences during pediatric hospitalization. They add context to closed-ended survey item responses and provide information about experiences of care important to children and families that are not included in quantitative surveys.
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.