Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40727592›Full record

ArticleHealth affairs scholar2025

The potential for patient-reported data and narratives to improve quality during emergency department boarding.

Kelly T Gleason, Kathryn M McDonald, Susan M Peterson, Diane Kuhn, Mark Schlesinger

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health affairs scholar, 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.

Kelly T GleasonJohns Hopkins University School of Nursing, Baltimore, MD 21205, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4203-6517
Kathryn M McDonaldJohns Hopkins University School of Nursing, Baltimore, MD 21205, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4049-5744
Susan M PetersonDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21205, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6191-627X
Diane KuhnDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN 46202, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6908-034X
Mark SchlesingerDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Yale University School of Public Health, New Haven, CT 06520, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7142-8667

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Emergency department (ED) boarding, the holding of admitted patients in the ED due to unavailable inpatient beds, is a growing challenge linked to poorer patient outcomes. Traditional patient experience surveys, such as the ED Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (ED CAHPS), exclude insights from boarded patients, whose experiences could inform quality improvement efforts. We collected data using the patient-reported outcomes to improve diagnostic experience in the ED instrument from all patients, whether discharged or admitted. Early findings show that longer ED stays correlate with lower patient-reported diagnostic quality scores, with the highest quartile of stay durations averaging 3.79 out of 5 compared to 4.10 in the lowest quartile. A separate nationwide survey of diagnostic experiences, which did not specifically ask about EDs or wait times, also highlighted the impact of long ED stays. Patient narratives emphasized the need for better communication during boarding, such as explaining the reasons for admission. These findings suggest that including boarded patients in ED CAHPS' sampling criteria and incorporating open-ended questions could provide valuable insights for improving ED boarding practices. This commentary emphasizes the value of patient-driven data in identifying actionable solutions to mitigate the challenges of ED boarding.

Indexed as

diagnostic qualityemergency departmentpatient experience surveyspatient-reported outcomesquality improvement

Identifiers

PMID40727592
PMCPMC12303624

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.