SynthesisJournal of general internal medicine2026
Enhancing Patient-Dedicated Time in Clinical Encounters: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Intervention Strategies.
Synthesis in Journal of general internal medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Impact of a clinical encounter time protection program on pain management: a retrospective difference-in-difference study.International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2025Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHospitals' institutional programs designed to protect or increase the time dedicated to interactions between patients and healthcare professionals, while growing in popularity, often lack formal evaluation. This study aims to quantify the effectiveness of programs designed to protect or enhance the quality or quantity of clinical encounter time between hospitalized patients and healthcare professionals.
methodsA systematic literature review and random-effects meta-analysis were performed on Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science databases. Studies had to include ≥ 80% adult inpatients in acute care, compare groups, and assess at least one of the following outcomes: patient satisfaction, length of stay, home discharge, or 30-day readmission. Screening, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment were performed independently and in duplicate. Risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-I tool for non-randomized trials, and the Cochrane 2.0 instrument for randomized trials.
resultsA total of 117 unique studies comprising 298,517 patients were included. Compared to their controls, interventions increased the proportion of satisfied patients (+ 8% [95% CI, + 4.7 to + 11.4%]; 26 studies, 20,456 patients), the proportion of patients discharged home (+ 2.6% [95% CI, + 0.3 to + 5.0%]; 21 studies, 61,539 patients), and reduced length of stay (- 1.07 days [95% CI, - 1.62 to - 0.52]; 58 studies, 160,080 patients) without significant difference in readmission rates (- 0.8% [95% CI - 1.8 to + 0.2%]; 49 studies, 177,677 patients). Most studies were at high risk of bias, even among randomized trials. Programs varied widely in interventions, contexts, and findings. DISCUSSION: Programs enhancing or protecting clinical encounter time in acute care may improve patient experience, care quality, and discharge processes. Higher quality randomized controlled trials evaluating such interventions are warranted. Future programs may benefit from studies that draw on multi-disciplinary knowledge and implementation sciences to identify contextual factors impacting their success. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: Prospero CRD42023453402.
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.