ArticleBMJ open quality2024
Preliminary adaptation of the systems thinking for everyday work cue card set in a US healthcare system: a pragmatic and participatory co-design approach.
Article in BMJ open quality, 2024. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionHealthcare is a highly complex adaptive system, requiring a systems approach to understand its behaviour better. We adapt the Systems Thinking for Everyday Work (STEW) cue cards, initially introduced as a systems approach tool in the UK, in a US healthcare system as part of a study investigating the feasibility of a systems thinking approach for front-line workers.
methodsThe original STEW cards were adapted using consensus-building methods with front-line staff and safety leaders.
resultsEach card was examined for relevance, applicability, language and aesthetics (colour, style, visual cues and size). Two sets of cards were created due to the recognition that systems thinking was relatively new in healthcare and that the successful use of the principles on the cards would need initial facilitation to ensure their effective application. Six principles were agreed on and are presented in the cards: Your System outlines the need to agree that problems belong to a system and that the system must be defined. Viewpoints ensure that multiple voices are heard within the discussion. Work Condition highlights the resources, constraints and barriers that exist in the system and contribute to the system's functions. Interactions ask participants to understand how parts of the system interact to perform the work. Performance guides users to understand how work can be performed daily. Finally, Understanding seeks to promote a just cultural environment of appreciating that people do what makes sense to them. The two final sets of cards were scored using a content validity survey, with a final score of 1.
conclusionsThe cards provide an easy-to-use guide to help users understand the system being studied, learn from problems encountered and understand the everyday work involved in providing excellent care. The cards offer a practical 'systems approach' for use within complex healthcare systems.
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.