ArticleJournal of participatory medicine2025
Proof of Concept for a Digital Framework to Support a Shared Agenda at Surgical Ward Rounds: Participatory Design Study.
Article in Journal of participatory medicine, 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.
- Association Between a Co-Designed Dashboard and Use of Costly Health Services in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease and Advanced Cancer: Propensity Score-Adjusted Difference-in-Differences Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Surgical ward rounds (SWRs) are often unstructured and deprioritized compared to traditional surgical tasks, leading to limited interdisciplinary collaboration, unprepared patients, and low family attendance. Objective: This study aims to co-design and develop a digital framework to facilitate a shared agenda for SWRs, ensuring all core participants can attend and participate effectively. Methods: Participatory design (PD) methodologies were used, using user-engaging activities within an iterative process. A multidisciplinary team, including patients, relatives, health care providers, technology designers, and researchers, collaborated in workshops and testing to translate user needs into prototypes of technologies consisting of the digital framework. Results: A logistics system was developed for nurses to prebook the SWRs in designated time slots, enabling them to prepare relevant data and partake in the dialogue with patients. In addition, a mobile health (mHealth) app displayed the schedule for patients and relatives, helping them to participate and prepare questions in advance. Multiple iterations ensured that the digital framework met user needs and was feasible for clinical practice. Conclusions: Our findings underscore the importance of collaboration between users and technology designers in developing digital health technologies. Engaging the users helped identify technical and organizational constraints that needed to be addressed to integrate the digital framework into clinical settings.
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.