Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40460300›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2025

Methods of Piloting an Abstraction Tool to Describe Family Engagement in the Hospital Setting: Retrospective Chart Review.

Jennifer Morgan, Jennifer Cahill, Christine Ritchie, Lingling Zhang, Priscilla Gazarian

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR formative research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Jennifer MorganManning College of Nursing and Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Boston, Boston, MA, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-7272-5367
Jennifer CahillYvonne L. Munn Center for Nursing Research, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-2879-8395
Christine RitchieDivision of Palliative Care and Geriatric Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-4881-9416
Lingling ZhangManning College of Nursing and Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Boston, Boston, MA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-9988-6512
Priscilla GazarianTan Chingfen Graduate School of Nursing, University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School, Worcester, MA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-4928-293X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Family engagement in hospitals is crucial for improving outcomes and ensuring holistic, patient-centered care. However, there is limited understanding of how providers document family engagement in electronic medical records (EMR) and how factors such as race and health disparities influence engagement practices. The absence of standardized EMR templates complicates tracking engagement and assessing its impact on patient outcomes. Retrospective chart review (RCR) is an effective method for investigating clinical practice and how family engagement is documented, using both structured and unstructured data from patient records. Despite its potential, gaps remain in the literature regarding distinctions between the prepilot and pilot phases in RCR studies. Objective: This article describes the prepiloting and piloting stages in the development of an abstraction tool for an RCR study, highlighting how these phases refined the tool for extracting family engagement data from the EMRs. Methods: A cohort of 2032 medical records was selected using the Research Patient Database Registry and EMRs. Initially, a draft tool was tested during the prepilot phase to assess its stability. To optimize diversity, the sample was then stratified by race. The modified tool was subsequently piloted on a subset of the sample. Results: The prepilot phase tested the tool on 9 records. In the pilot phase, the tool was applied to 39 records, representing approximately 10% of the sample. After the prepiloting and piloting phases, 293 of the 405 patient records were deemed eligible for inclusion. More than three-quarters of patients had documentation of presence and communication; whereas, only about one-third had documentation of shared decision-making involving families. Conclusions: The prepilot phase helped standardize the abstraction tool, align it with the EMRs, and address potential biases. The pilot phase provided insights into data availability and highlighted areas for refinement before finalizing the tool for the remaining records. Together, these phases ensured the tool's effectiveness for use in large-scale RCR studies.

Indexed as

Electronic Health RecordsFamilyHospitalsFemaleHumansMalePilot ProjectsRetrospective Studiesabstraction toolcare transitionsdata extractiondecision-makingelectronic medical recordEMRfamily-centered carefamily engagementhospital settingmedical recordmedical record reviewpatient carepatient family centered careretrospective chart review

Identifiers

PMID40460300
PMCPMC12151451

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.