Observational studyInternational journal of nursing studies2023
Predicting patient deterioration by nurse intuition: The development and validation of the nurse intuition patient deterioration scale.
Observational study in International journal of nursing studies, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Validation and Psychometric Evaluation of the Persian Version of the Nurse Intuition Patient Deterioration Scale: A Methodological Study.Nursing open · 2026Article
- Validation and performance of a geriatric early warning score (GEWS) versus the national early warning score (NEWS) in predicting clinical deterioration in frail older patients.European geriatric medicine · 2026Observational
- Turkish version of the Nurse Intuition Patient Deterioration Scale: cross-cultural adaptation and validation study.BMC nursing · 2026Article
- Predictive Value of Combined MEWS and NIPDS Scores for 24-Hour Clinical Deterioration in Emergency Observation Patients: A Prospective Cohort Study.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2026Article
- Development and Validation of a NEWS2-Enhanced Multivariable Prediction Model for Clinical Deterioration and In-Hospital Mortality in Hospitalized Adults.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
- Development and validation of the Chinese version of the adult sedentary behavior reduction intention questionnaire based on the theory of planned behavior.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Be-SNAP: the Belgian Sepsis National Action Plan.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Analysis of Influencing Factors of Junior ICU Nurses' Recognition and Response Abilities to Clinical Deterioration: A Cross-Sectional Study.Critical care research and practice · 2025Article
- Commentary: Predicting patient deterioration by nurse intuition: the development and validation of the Nurse Intuition Patient Deterioration Scale.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionEarly warning scores based on vital signs are used in hospitals to estimate patient deterioration and to initiate an adequate and timely response when necessary. These scores show acceptable performance in predicting patient outcomes. However, they tend to generate many false positives leading to an increased workload in clinical practice. Additionally, nurses feel a tension between the application of an early warning score and their own clinical judgement. Nurse intuition is often included as an extra call criterion next to an early warning score. It is therefore important to investigate its predictive value. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a Nurse Intuition Patient Deterioration Scale (NIPDS).
methodsThe NIPDS was developed using the latest evidence after which relevant items were selected by an expert panel. The scale was tested in a prospective observational study in 2 surgical and 2 medical wards in a Belgian hospital. Data were collected from December 1st, 2019 until March 31st, 2020. A NIPDS registration was done at each patient admission and whenever the attending nurse felt worried. The studied outcomes were urgent physician assistance call, resuscitation team call, patient death, and unplanned transfer to intensive/medium care. Psychometric analyses and scale optimisation were carried out using Rasch modelling techniques. Finally, the scale's accuracy and an optimal threshold were determined.
resultsThe scale item content validity index is 0.88 indicating that the selected items should be included in the instrument according to the expert panel. Item-total score correlation coefficients range between 0.573 (item 9 - pain) and 0.874 (item 6 - behaviour). The Person Separation Index is 0.814 indicating satisfactory discriminatory power. An overall fit of the NIPDS data to the Rasch model was confirmed. Rasch modelling showed that the item 'pain' signalled misfit. Furthermore, the person-item map showed disordered items which were corrected in the final model. The AUROC to predict an event within 24 h after registration was 0.957 (95% CI 0.932-0.982; p < 0.001) indicating excellent model performance. DISCUSSION: The results showed that the NIPDS is a valid and accurate instrument to predict events in surgical and medical patients. It showed better performance compared to an existing score estimating nurse intuition. In practice, the NIPDS could be used by nurses to estimate clinical deterioration in addition to an early warning score. It remains unclear if the combination of NIPDS with an early warning score could reduce workload without losing accuracy and this should be explored in future research. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Newly developed nurse intuition scale, which uses clinical cues to estimate deterioration in hospitalised patients, is brief and performs well in predicting physician assistance, resuscitation team calls, patient death and unplanned transfer to intensive or medium care.
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.