ArticleJournal of multidisciplinary healthcare2025
Assessing Clinical Governance Awareness and Implementation Among Healthcare Professionals in Madinah, Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Community-engaged clinical governance and machine learning for optimizing tuberculosis management in rural Eastern Cape.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Clinical governance has been developed as a comprehensive approach to enhance the quality of care. As a new methodology, clinical governance is increasingly adopted by Saudi Arabian hospitals. Objective: This study aims to assess the awareness level of clinical governance among healthcare professionals in King Salman Medical City, Madinah, Saudi Arabia. Methods: This is a cross-sectional survey study that used a proportionate stratified sampling technique from July to October 2024. Data collection was done using a pre-developed questionnaire involving 65 items, measuring healthcare professionals' awareness of the seven domains of clinical governance. Descriptive analysis was employed using frequencies, means, and standard deviation. Meanwhile, the one-way Results: A total of 403 professionals responded to the survey with a response rate of 58%. Quantitative analysis revealed a notably high level of clinical governance implementation across all assessed areas in the hospital. Public and patient involvement stands out as the strongest area, with a mean difference of 0.846 and a t-value of 22.400, while risk management has a relatively lower mean difference of 0.578 with a t-value of 13.549. The descriptive statistics for public and patient involvement reveal slight variations in perceptions of involvement across different staff roles in the hospital. Doctors report the highest mean involvement level at 3.96 (SD = 0.74), with a 95% confidence interval ranging from 3.80 to 4.12. Laboratory specialists have the lowest mean at 3.60, with the largest variability (SD = 1.20), and their confidence interval (2.80 to 4.41) is wider. Conclusion: The study revealed a strong foundation in patient engagement, audit processes, and data management. Decision-makers need to encourage the culture of risk management and clinical effectiveness. Future researchers might shed light on the impact of clinical governance on patients' outcomes.
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.