ArticlePloS one2026
Aspects of implementing a nurse-based follow-up of patients with liver cirrhosis: A qualitative study.
Article in PloS one, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo explore aspects of implementing a nurse-based outpatient follow-up intervention for patients with liver cirrhosis by means of experiences reported by registered nurses, physicians and managers employed at six study clinics.
methodsThis explorative, qualitative and deductive study involved interviews with 29 healthcare professionals and managers about the implementation of the intervention. Repeated interviews were performed from 2018 to 2022. Directed content analysis was performed, based on a coding scheme from the PARiHS conceptual framework. Reporting followed the COREQ guidelines.
resultsThe analysis revealed 23 different factors that influenced implementation of the nurse-based intervention, which covered all PARiHS elements. Eleven factors reduced the likelihood of successful implementation, e.g., the randomised study design became a moral dilemma, lack of clarity, resources and supportive leaders in the organisation, unclear roles, and a fragile mandate for nurses to implement the intervention. Twelve factors improved the probability for implementation success. The intervention was deemed safe, relevant and in line with clinical goals. Managers could facilitate the nurses' role in the team, which supported the nurses' mandate and professional growth.
conclusionsIn conclusion, implementation of nurse-based interventions is facilitated by simple procedures that can be performed independently by RNs but also by the fact that the interventions are considered valuable for the clinic concerned. Staff shortage is a barrier to clinical research, and a moral dilemma might be experienced when not all patients in need of extensive care can be randomized to the intervention. An adequate number of benefits are needed to drive the success of an implementation. The PARiHS conceptual framework includes relevant perspectives required to implement evidence-based nursing practice.
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.