ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2026
Patient and Healthcare Provider Priorities for Risk Prediction of Hospital Readmission: A Nominal Group Technique Consensus Study.
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. 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
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNearly one in ten hospitalized adults is readmitted within 30 days. Though many models exist to predict risk of hospital readmission, many perform poorly and do not address the priorities of patients or providers that use them. In this study, we aimed to identify their priorities to inform a readmission risk prediction framework.
methodsUsing nominal group technique (NGT) methodology, we completed in-person and virtual meetings between February and April 2025 involving 22 total participants from Alberta, Canada. Participants included people with lived experience of a hospital readmission as a patient or caregiver as well as multidisciplinary healthcare providers. Discussions focused on the use of prediction tools, risk communication, and readmission type and relevant predictors. Priorities were collated, and each candidate suggestion within a topic was individually ranked by each participant indicating perceived importance. Priorities were then summarized and rank ordered using a mean standardized priority score.
resultsNine participants with lived experience (median age 56-65, 67% women, 33% rural) and 13 clinicians (median age group 36-45, 69% women, 77% physicians) participated in the meetings. Features most highly ranked by patients included using the tool to better inform patients and to plan discharge meetings, while those of clinicians focused on using a relevant time horizon, primarily risk of readmission ≤ 30 days, as well as presenting alerts of readmission risk within the patients' discharge summary. Both groups supported targeting all unplanned hospital readmissions and identified potential predictors including social determinants of health and laboratory markers. There were 163 total and 52 unique candidate predictors suggested, many of which were novel compared to existing models.
conclusionPatients and healthcare providers prioritized key features for readmission risk prediction frameworks, many of which differ from existing models. These findings can be used to inform the development of novel tools tailored to user needs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42225872What 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.