ArticleBMJ open2023
Protocol for developing a set of performance measures to monitor and evaluate delirium care quality for older adults in the emergency department using a modified e-Delphi process.
Article in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Developing a set of emergency department performance measures to evaluate delirium care quality for older adults: a modified e-Delphi study.BMC emergency medicine · 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
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionOlder adults are at high risk of developing delirium in the emergency department (ED). Delirium associated with an ED visit is independently linked to poorer outcomes such as increased length of hospital stay and mortality. Performance measures (PMs) are needed to identify variations in the quality of delirium care to help focus improvement efforts where they are most needed. A preliminary list of 11 quality statements and 24 PMs was developed based on a synthesis of high-quality clinical practice guidelines. The purpose of this study is to gain consensus on a subset of PMs that can be used to evaluate delirium care quality for older ED patients. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This protocol for a modified e-Delphi study is informed by the Guidance on Conducting and REporting DElphi Studies. Clinical experts from across Canada and internationally will be recruited through peer referral, professional organisations and social media calls for expressions of interest. A minimum of 17 participants will be recruited. The primary survey for each round will consist of closed-ended questions with the opportunity to provide comments to justify decisions and clarify understanding. Using 9-point Likert scales, participants will rate each quality statement according to the concepts of importance and actionability, then its associated PMs according to the concept of necessity. Results will be fed back to participants in subsequent rounds. A priori stopping criteria have been defined in terms of consensus and stability. A minimum of three rounds will be undertaken to allow participants to have feedback, revise previous responses, then stabilise responses. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was provided at the University of Manitoba Health Research Ethics Board (ID HS25728 (H2022:340)). Informed consent will be obtained electronically using the Research Electronic Data Capture secure online platform. Knowledge translation and dissemination will be done through traditional (eg, conference presentations, peer-reviewed publications) and non-traditional (eg, ED Grand Rounds) strategies.
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.