ArticleBMJ open quality2023
Measuring practice preference variation for quality improvement: development of the Neonatology Survey of Interdisciplinary Groups in Healthcare Tool (NSIGHT).
Article in BMJ open quality, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Factorial vignettes describe suspected early onset sepsis practice variation in a multicenter NICU antibiotic stewardship collaborative.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2025Article
- Nasal Intermittent Positive Pressure Ventilation: Guideline Implementation Guided by Practice Preference Measurement.Pediatric quality & safetyArticle
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
backgroundUnderstanding behavioural psychology and the human side of change are guiding principles for quality improvement (QI). Tools to measure these to guide improvement efforts are lacking.
methodsWe created a clinical vignette-based survey to measure provider preferences for respiratory care in the neonatal intensive care unit. Fourteen vignettes were included, each vignette offering two reasonable practice choices. Responses were based on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from neutral to strong preference for either choice. The survey was completed by physicians, nurses, advanced practice providers and respiratory therapists in 2017 and again in 2019. Net preference was measured as the median value of responses, and agreement was measured as the SD of responses. Net preference and agreement were assessed for all responses, by discipline, and by year.
resultsResponse rates were 51% of all staff in 2017 and 57% in 2019. Vignettes asking about non-invasive respiratory support showed more defined net preferences and higher agreement between years, coinciding with QI efforts and guideline implementation in this area during the interval time. Results on other areas of practice were consistent between years. Discipline comparisons showed nurses and physicians agreed the least often. Six response patterns were identified, ranging from net preference and high agreement to no net preference and low agreement.
conclusionWe propose this survey, called the Neonatology Survey of Interdisciplinary Groups in Healthcare Tool, is a novel method for measurement of hospital unit psychology and culture. Demonstrated improvement where QI efforts were focused and consistency in results in other areas support the validity of this tool. Measuring the human side of change may impact QI efforts.
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.