ArticleBMC health services research2026
Patients' caring needs for a patient-friendly magnetic resonance imaging examination: a qualitative study.
Article in BMC health services research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMagnetic resonance imaging is essential to accurately check patients’ health status and apply optimal nursing care and treatment. Understanding patients’ experiences and caring needs is crucial for completing the examination safely and improving the quality of the images that aid decision-making regarding treatment. This study explored patients’ caring needs for patient-friendly magnetic resonance imaging.
methodsA descriptive qualitative study design was used. Participants were 20 patients (12 men and eight women) aged 19–80 years who received magnetic resonance imaging at a tertiary hospital. Participants were recruited using a combination of flyer-based recruitment in the magnetic resonance imaging units and snowball sampling. Data were collected through in-depth semi-structured interviews from May to June 2024 and analyzed using conventional content analysis. The COREQ guidelines were used to check the rigor of the study.
resultsThree themes were derived: (1) information support and effective communication; (2) attentive care that minimizes physical limitations; and (3) emotional consideration to relieve lingering negative memories of being overwhelmed by machines.
conclusionDuring disease identification and treatment, patients’ perspectives should be fully considered to ensure high-quality examination experiences. To perform a patient-friendly magnetic resonance imaging procedure, healthcare providers should actively participate and work together to create an examination environment that improves patients’ physical and mental well-being. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.