ArticleResuscitation plus2024
Development and testing of a resuscitation-specific measure of organizational culture for resuscitation teams.
Article in Resuscitation plus, 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: The organizational culture (shared beliefs, perceptions, and values) of teams informs their behaviours and practices. Little is known about organizational culture for resuscitation teams. Our objective was to develop a reliable and valid resuscitation-specific organizational culture instrument (ROCI) with the goal of improving team performance. Methods: Using Neonatal Resuscitation Program principles, literature review, and discussion of existing culture measures with experts, we identified organizational culture components for resuscitation and adapted existing measures to resuscitation. We developed a ROCI with five subscales (role clarity, shared-mental models, closed-loop communication, team adaptability, and psychological safety) and administered it to neonatal resuscitation team members across a hospital network. Survey psychometric assessment included reliability analyses (Cronbach's α, Pearson correlation coefficients) and validity testing (confirmatory factor analysis [CFA] and regression models examining the association of culture with implementation outcomes: climate and perceived success). Results: Across 11 hospitals there were 318 complete responses (41 % response rate). Of the 22-items tested, 18 were retained after iterative psychometric assessment. The ROCI had excellent overall reliability (Cronbach's α = 0.994) and very good subscale reliability (Cronbach's α = 0.789-0.867). The CFA goodness-of-fit statistics confirmed five constructs (subscales). At the individual-level, the ROCI and all subscales were associated with both implementation outcomes. At the hospital-level, the ROCI overall and three subscales were associated with perceived success. Conclusion: The ROCI is a reliable and valid measure of the organizational culture of resuscitation teams. Future ROCI assessments may provide a foundation to inform culture change initiatives to improve resuscitation quality and outcomes across populations and contexts.
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.