ArticleBJPsych bulletin2023
Patients' experiences of clinical team meetings (ward rounds) at an adult in-patient eating disorders ward: mixed-method service improvement project.
Article in BJPsych bulletin, 2023. 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.
- Learning From Those Who Have Lived: A Scoping Review Exploring the Involvement of Lived Experience Co-Design in Eating Disorder Research Methodologies.The International journal of eating disorders · 2025Article
- Beyond the methodological binary: coproduction as the third pillar of mental health science.BMJ mental health · 2025Article
- How is the in-patient psychiatric ward round understood in research literature? Scoping review.BJPsych bulletin · 2025Review
- Applying integrated enhanced cognitive behaviour therapy (I-CBTE) to severe and longstanding eating disorders (SEED) Paper 2: An in-depth case study for clinicians.Journal of eating disorders · 2024Article
- Experiences of intensive treatment for people with eating disorders: a systematic review and thematic synthesis.Journal of eating disorders · 2024Review
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
aimsWard rounds are key to treatment-related decision-making, but are often stressful. This project aimed to explore and improve patients' experiences of the clinical team meeting (CTM; historically known as ward round) in an adult in-patient eating disorders unit. A mixed-method approach was adopted with
resultsThe mean CTM duration was 14.3 min. Patients spoke half of the time, followed by psychiatry colleagues. 'Request' was the most discussed category. Three themes were identified: CTMs are important but impersonal, a sense of palpable anxiety was generated and staff and patients had divergent views regarding CTM goals. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: The co-produced changes to CTMs were implemented and improved patient's experiences despite COVID-19 challenges. Factors beyond CTMs, including the ward's power hierarchy, culture and language, need addressing to facilitate shared decision-making.
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.