ArticleRevista da Escola de Enfermagem da U S P2023
Comparison of patient classification systems for dimensioning nursing staff.
Article in Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da U S P, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- HealthCare Complexity Index (HCIn): A Clinical Decision-Making Tool for Primary Care.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Pneumothorax: Demographics, Treatment, and Nursing Care.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Intention to leave work among nursing professionals at three university hospitals in Brazil.Revista brasileira de enfermagem · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare nursing staff workload and dimensioning measured by two patient classification systems.
methodCross-sectional study, developed in a clinical inpatient unit of a large hospital in southern Brazil, between June and August 2022. Included patients (n = 260) were assessed through two different patient classification systems. The dimensioning calculation provided by the standard and descriptive statistics were applied.
resultsOf the total number of patients, 1,248 classifications were performed with each of the classification systems. One of the instruments showed a concentration of demand for minimal care (54.5%) and the other for intermediate care (63.4%). The anticipation of required nursing hours was discrepant (235.58 and 298.16 hours), as well as the projected nursing staff, which was of 53 and 67 workers, respectively.
conclusionMeasurement of workload and dimensioning were different when using two patient classification systems in the same sample. Additional accuracy studies shall be carried out.
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.