Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38741257›Full record

Observational studyJournal of hospital medicine2024

What do patients and families observe about pediatric safety?: A thematic analysis of real-time narratives.

Christine Studenmund, Audrey Lyndon, James R Stotts, Caroline Peralta-Neel, Anjana E Sharma, Naomi S Bardach

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Journal of hospital medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
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

6 authors.

Christine StudenmundDepartment of Pediatrics, School of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, California, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9130-826X
Audrey LyndonRory Meyers College of Nursing, New York University, New York, New York, USA.
James R StottsDepartment of Quality and Patient Safety, University of California, San Francisco, California, USA.
Caroline Peralta-NeelDepartment of Pediatrics, Philip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy Studies, University of California, San Francisco, California, USA.
Anjana E SharmaDepartment of Family & Community Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, California, USA.
Naomi S BardachDepartment of Pediatrics, Philip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy Studies, University of California, San Francisco, California, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5178-0719

Funding

The Family Input for Quality and Safety (FIQS) StudyR01HD100393 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI BARDACH, NAOMI SHULA · 2020 to 2024
$3.7M
Novel IT to Create Patient-Integrated Quality ImprovementR21HS024553 · AHRQ · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI BARDACH, NAOMI SHULA · 2016 to 2017
$297k
ExPERTS-PC: Engaging Patients in Event ReporTing for Safety in Primary CareK08HS028477 · AHRQ · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI SHARMA, ANJANA ESTELLE · 2021 to 2022
$297k
AHRQ HHS K08 HS028477AHRQ HHS R21 HS024553Doctor's Foundation CompanyNICHD NIH HHS R01 HD100393
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesData on inpatient safety are documented by hospital staff through incident reporting (IR) systems. Safety observations from families or patients are rarely captured. The Family Input for Quality and Safety (FIQS) study created a mobile health tool for pediatric patients and their families to anonymously report safety observations in real time during hospitalization. The study objectives were to describe these observations and identify domains salient to safety.

methodsIn this observational study, we analyzed pediatric patient safety reports from June 2017 to April 2018. Participants were: English-speaking family members and hospitalized patients ≥13 years old. The analysis had two stages: (1) assessment of whether narratives met established safety event criteria and whether there were companion IRs; (2) thematic analysis to identify domains.

resultsOf 248 enrolled participants, 58 submitted 120 narrative reports. Of the narratives, 68 (57%) met safety event criteria, while only 1 (0.8%) corresponded to a staff-reported IR. Twenty-five percent of narratives shared positive feedback about patient safety efforts; 75% shared constructive feedback. We identified domains particularly salient to safety: (1) patients and families as safety actors; (2) emotional safety; (3) system-centered care; and (4) shared safety domains, including medication, communication, and environment of care. Some domains capture data that is otherwise difficult to obtain (#1-3), while others fit within standard healthcare safety domains (#4).

conclusionsPatients and families observe and report salient safety events that can fill gaps in IR data. Healthcare leaders should consider incorporating patient and family observations-collected with an option for anonymity and eliciting both positive and constructive comments.

Indexed as

FamilyNarrationPatient SafetyAdolescentAdultChildFemaleHospitalizationHumansMaleRisk Management

Identifiers

PMID38741257
PMCPMC12124371

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.