Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37628427›Full record

ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2023

Feedback for Emergency Ambulance Staff: A National Review of Current Practice Informed by Realist Evaluation Methodology.

Caitlin Wilson, Gillian Janes, Rebecca Lawton, Jonathan Benn

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
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

4 authors.

Caitlin WilsonSchool of Psychology, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-9854-4289
Gillian JanesFaculty of Health and Education, Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester M15 6BH, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1609-5898
Rebecca LawtonSchool of Psychology, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5832-402X
Jonathan BennSchool of Psychology, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5919-9905

Funding

NIHR Yorkshire and Humber Patient Safety Translational Research Centre no number
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Research suggests that feedback in Emergency Medical Services (EMS) positively affects quality of care and professional development. However, the mechanisms by which feedback achieves its effects still need to be better understood across healthcare settings. This study aimed to understand how United Kingdom (UK) ambulance services provide feedback for EMS professionals and develop a programme theory of how feedback works within EMS, using a mixed-methods, realist evaluation framework. A national cross-sectional survey was conducted to identify feedback initiatives in UK ambulance services, followed by four in-depth case studies involving qualitative interviews and documentary analysis. We used qualitative content analysis and descriptive statistics to analyse survey responses from 40 prehospital feedback initiatives, alongside retroductive analysis of 17 interviews and six documents from case study sites. Feedback initiatives mainly provided individual patient outcome feedback through "

Indexed as

ambulancesEmergency Medical Servicesfeedbackhealth services evaluationorganizational case studies

Identifiers

PMID37628427
PMCPMC10454701

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.