ArticleBMC nursing2026
Using informal caregivers' experience data to inform quality improvement in healthcare settings: a mixed-methods systematic review.
Article in BMC nursing, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite the substantial experience and knowledge generated daily by informal caregivers and their well-documented contribution to health outcomes, quality improvement efforts in healthcare continue to focus primarily on patients' experiences. Yet patients' perspectives differ in important ways from those of informal caregivers. The aim of the study was to explore how informal caregivers' experiences are collected and used to inform QI initiatives in healthcare settings, rather than to examine caregivers' experiences per se.
methodsA mixed-methods systematic review with a convergent segregated approach was conducted. Searches in four scientific databases (Medline, Web of Science, PsycInfo, and CINAHL) from inception to 20 May 2025 were conducted. The searches yielded 8,648 records, whereof 83 full texts were screened, and 13 studies met the inclusion criteria.
resultsExperience-based co-design or its accelerated form were common methods for collecting experiential data. A wide range of interventions were implemented using these data, targeting improvements in clinical care, education, research, or system-level processes. Most studies focused on enhancing clinical care, including changes to care processes, improved interdisciplinary teamwork, and strengthened family-centred communication. System-level interventions addressed areas such as complaints and grievance reporting, and investigation of adverse events.
conclusionIntegrating the perspectives of informal caregivers into quality improvement initiatives has the potential to improve clinical care, strengthen medical and nursing education, inform clinical research, and enhance patient safety. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: The study protocol was registered on PROSPERO before the commencement of the review (registration number CRD42023400597).
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.