Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36797827›Full record

ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2023

Developing the Resident Measure of Safety in Care Homes (RMOS): A Delphi and Think Aloud Study.

Natasha Tyler, Claire Planner, Bethany Shears, Andrea Hernan, Maria Panagioti, Sally Giles

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Developing the Resident Measure of Safety in Care Homes (RMOS): A Delphi and Think Aloud Study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Natasha TylerNational Institute for Health and Care Research Greater Manchester Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, Division of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8257-1090
Claire PlannerNational Institute for Health and Care Research Greater Manchester Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, Division of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Bethany ShearsLeeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK.
Andrea HernanFaculty of Health, Deakin University, Warrnambool, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-4542-1186
Maria PanagiotiNational Institute for Health and Care Research Greater Manchester Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, Division of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7153-5745
Sally GilesNational Institute for Health and Care Research Greater Manchester Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, Division of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1623-6029

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis study aimed to develop a measure of contributory factors to safety incidents in care homes to be completed by residents and/or their unpaid carers.

introductionCare home residents are particularly vulnerable to patient safety incidents, due to higher likelihood of frailty, multimorbidity and cognitive decline. However, despite residents and their carers wanting to be involved in safety initiatives, there are few mechanisms for them to contribute and make meaningful safety improvements to practice.

methodsWe developed 73 evidence-based items from synthesis and existing measures, which we presented to a panel of stakeholders (residents/carers, health/social care professionals and researchers). We used two online rounds of Delphi to generate consensus (80%) on items important to include in the Resident Measure of Safety in Care Homes (RMOS); a consensus meeting was later held. The draft RMOS developed through the Delphi was presented to participants during 'Think Aloud' interviews using cognitive testing techniques.

resultsThe 29-item RMOS was developed. Forty-three participants completed Delphi round 1, and 27 participants completed round 2, 11 participants attended the consensus meeting and 12 'Think Aloud' interviews were conducted. Of the 73 original items, 42 items that did not meet consensus in Delphi round 1 were presented in round 2. After the consensus meeting, it was agreed that 35 items would comprise the RMOS questionnaire and were presented in the 'Think Aloud' interviews. Participants suggested numerous changes to items mostly to improve comprehension and ability to answer.

conclusionWe have a developed an evidence-based RMOS, with good face validity, to assess contributory factors to safety in care homes from a resident/carer perspective. Future work will involve psychometrically testing the items in a pilot and developing a complementary simplified, dementia-friendly version to promote inclusivity. PATIENT OR PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT: Four patient and public contributors worked with researchers to develop the online questionnaires. Patients (residents) and carers participated on the consensus panel. One member of the research team is an expert by lived experience and was involved in design and analysis decisions. The item list and instructions for the questionnaires were reviewed for face validity, understanding and acceptability by a patient and public involvement group and modified.

Indexed as

CaregiversHealth PersonnelDelphi TechniqueHumansResearch DesignSurveys and Questionnairescare homesconsensus methodscontributory factors to safetyDelphinursing homesolder adultspatient-reported safety

Identifiers

PMID36797827
PMCPMC10154851

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.