Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41089026›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2025

Nursing Minimum Datasets in Long-Term Care Settings: Scoping Review.

Sarah Milkov, Lara Linders, Alina Napetschnig, Wolfgang Deiters, Erika Sirsch, Daniela Holle

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

6 authors.

Sarah MilkovDepartment of Nursing, Midwifery, and Therapy Sciences, Bochum University of Applied Sciences Health Campus, Gesundheitscampus 6-8, Bochum, 44801, Germany, 49 23477727701.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1230-3717
Lara LindersDepartment of Nursing, Midwifery, and Therapy Sciences, Bochum University of Applied Sciences Health Campus, Gesundheitscampus 6-8, Bochum, 44801, Germany, 49 23477727701.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0004-3941-5921
Alina NapetschnigDepartment of Health Sciences, Bochum University of Applied Sciences Health Campus, Bochum, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4359-8255
Wolfgang DeitersDepartment of Health Sciences, Bochum University of Applied Sciences Health Campus, Bochum, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5088-4324
Erika SirschInstitute of Medical Education, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9923-5499
Daniela HolleDepartment of Nursing, Midwifery, and Therapy Sciences, Bochum University of Applied Sciences Health Campus, Gesundheitscampus 6-8, Bochum, 44801, Germany, 49 23477727701.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6563-4712

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Standardized and structured data collection is necessary in the health care sector to advance nursing research, enable the comparison of practice-based data, and optimize the potential of technological innovations and digitalization. This can be supported by nursing minimum datasets (NMDSs). Objective: This scoping review aims to present the state of research on NMDSs in long-term care settings. Methods: Articles addressing NMDSs in long-term care published in the PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, or Digital Bibliography & Library Project databases up to September 2024 were included. Additionally, forward and backward citation tracking and manual searches of original records were conducted. All types of articles were included, with no time limit, and the articles had to be in English or German. The selected sources were screened and evaluated in a double-review process. Evaluation was carried out using a qualitative content analysis approach, supplemented by inductive and model-based categorization, and concluded with a final narrative synthesis. Results: A total of 36 sources covering 9 NMDS projects or initiatives were included. Most of the included articles (15/36, 42%) were published between 2004 and 2015. The United States accounted for the largest share (16/36, 44%) of the country of origin. The topic of NMDSs has gained more relevance in recent years, with 5 sources from 2022 to 2024 being found. Most publications were overview articles (15/36, 42%), followed by reviews and discussion papers (5/36, 14% each), highlighting the literature's predominantly conceptual and discursive focus. Various types of NMDSs were identified, including country-specific, topic-specific, and international adaptations of the US NMDS systems. The content of the NMDSs could be categorized as patient, interpersonal, or institutional data. The most comprehensive information is available on the US NMDS. Many initiatives were described but few have been developed or are currently in use. The literature included recommendations at the clinical, scientific, and administrative levels, emphasizing standardization, stakeholder involvement, and using NMDS data to improve care practices and policies. Conclusions: NMDS initiatives are becoming increasingly important in the context of digitalization, demographic change, and legislative developments, especially in Europe. Existing NMDSs primarily focus on patient data, and nursing interventions, outcomes, and the perspectives of individuals in need of care have so far received little attention. A lack of standardized descriptions and scientifically usable content hinders comparability and further development, underscoring the need for legal frameworks and stronger involvement from health care practitioners and researchers.

Indexed as

Long-Term CareHumanscare homedatabaseslong-term carenursingnursing informaticsnursing minimum datasetstandards

Identifiers

PMID41089026
PMCPMC12521810

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.