ArticleF1000Research2023
Protocol for a scoping review of work system design in health care.
Article in F1000Research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDelivery of safe and reliable healthcare to patients and the healthcare workforce shortage amidst growing demand has been major challenge to the healthcare system. Addressing this challenge calls for designing or redesigning of healthcare work system. Work system design which is usually associated with productivity in manufacturing offers a wide spectrum of applicability in addressing this challenge of healthcare system. Despite the availability of primary studies on work system design in healthcare, there are sparse published reviews in specific contexts. This scoping review explores the existing evidence to understand the state of the art of work system design in healthcare.
methodsThe scoping review adopts the methodology of Joanna Briggs Institute for scoping review which is based on the methodological framework of Arksey and O'Malley. The search will be done on PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science for the identification of eligible studies. A grey literature search will also be performed. A two-phase screening and extraction of data will be done by two independent reviewers. Data extraction will be done on a pre-piloted data extraction form. The findings will be presented in tables, figures, and a narrative summary. The scoping review will highlight the state of the art, gaps in knowledge and provide directions for future research. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This is a scoping review of primary studies and therefore ethical approval is not required. The report of the findings will be presented in line with the PRISMA reporting guidelines for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR). The results will be submitted to a peer-reviewed scientific journal for publication and presented at relevant conferences.
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.