ArticleATS scholar2024
Validating the Physician Documentation Quality Instrument for Intensive Care Unit-Ward Transfer Notes.
Article in ATS scholar, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Growing Use of Copy-Paste and Its Impact on Creation and Propagation of Documentation Errors.CHEST pulmonary · 2026Article
- Toward Responsible and Privacy-Preserving Generation of Inpatient Clinical Discharge Notes Using Large Language Models.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2026Article
- Assessing the quality of AI-generated clinical notes: validated evaluation of a large language model ambient scribe.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2025Article
- Assessments to Ensure Quality of Notes during Transfer of Patient Care.ATS scholar · 2024Article
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
Background: Physician communication failures during transfers of patients from the intensive care unit (ICU) to the general ward are common and can lead to adverse events. Efforts to improve written handoffs during these transfers are increasingly prominent, but no instruments have been developed to assess the quality of physician ICU-ward transfer notes. Objective: To collect validity evidence for the modified nine-item Physician Documentation Quality Instrument (mPDQI-9) for assessing ICU-ward transfer note usefulness across several hospitals. Methods: Twenty-four physician raters independently used the mPDQI-9 to grade 12 notes collected from three academic hospitals. Results: Mean mPDQI-9 scores by note ranged from 19 (SD = 5.5) to 30 (SD = 4.2). Mean note ratings did not systematically differ by rater expertise (for interaction, Conclusions: We report moderate validity evidence for the mPDQI-9 to assess the usefulness of ICU-ward transfer notes written by internal medicine residents.
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.