ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2026
A Scoping Review of Qualitative Studies on Inpatient Care for Individuals with Sickle Cell Disease.
Article 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 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIndividuals with sickle cell disease (SCD) frequently require care in the inpatient setting. Yet, there is no consensus on what comprises quality inpatient SCD care. Understanding patient, caregiver, and healthcare professional perspectives is a foundational step to defining inpatient SCD care quality.
objectivesEstablish a patient, caregiver, and healthcare professional-informed foundation for quality inpatient SCD care by synthesizing qualitative literature related to the inpatient SCD care experience.
methodWe searched Embase.com, Global Index Medicus, MEDLINE, APA PsycINFO via Ovid, Scopus, CINAHL, and Web of Science for peer-reviewed articles reporting on qualitative experiences on inpatient SCD care from inception to June 15, 2023. We dually screened studies, extracting key information from included articles before conducting thematic analysis using meta-aggregation.
resultsWe included 42 studies that explored perspectives of patients (n = 32, 7%), caregivers (n = 12, 29%), and healthcare team members (n = 9, 21%). We synthesized six meta-themes: (1) established inpatient clinical infrastructure is necessary for patient-centered inpatient SCD care, (2) comprehensive SCD care needs to wrap around all healthcare contexts, (3) enabling shared decision-making in pain management, (4) mitigating the impact of bias and stigma, (5) individualized care, (6) mental health and traumatic experiences, and (7) SCD-specific advocacy and education. Themes aligned with the Donabedian model of quality care including structural barriers (e.g., inadequate hospital staffing, limited electronic medical record access), process-related gaps (e.g., ineffective pain management, poor provider-patient communication), and outcome-driven priorities (e.g., timely pain relief, improved continuity of care).
conclusionIndividuals with SCD are forced to experience and navigate the intersectional impacts of having a chronic condition from birth, a higher risk of socioeconomic disadvantage, and healthcare delivery prone to racial bias and opioid-related stigma. This review highlights key areas of quality inpatient SCD care, emphasizing the need for system-wide changes in clinical infrastructure, provider education, and patient-centered policies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41996070What 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.