ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Development of a phased discharge planning for patients undergoing airway stenting: a Delphi study informed by the timing it right framework.
Article in Frontiers in 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aimed to develop a dynamic, phased discharge planning intervention and optimize the nursing care pathway for patients with airway stenosis undergoing airway stenting, to address gaps in complication management and home care competencies following the procedure. Methods: Employing the Timing It Right (TIR) as a theoretical basis, the initial program was developed through integrated literature review, semi-structured interviews with 7 physicians, 9 nurses and 8 patients, and expert panel group discussions. Subsequent refinement involved three iterative rounds of Delphi consultation with domain experts. Revisions were made based on aggregated feedback to finalize the program. Results: Three rounds of expert consultation were completed, with questionnaires distributed via email and WeChat. Response rates were 95.24, 100, and 100% across the respective rounds. The expert authority coefficient (Cr) exceeded 0.7 throughout; coefficient of variation ranged from 0.05 to 0.17, 0.06 to 0.23, and 0.06 to 0.19; Kendall's W values were 0.172, 0.166, and 0.187, respectively ( Conclusion: The discharge planning intervention, structured around the Timing It Right Framework, demonstrates scientific rigor and operational feasibility, offering a standardized and comprehensive roadmap for the post-stenting care of patients. Prospective clinical trials are required in future research to quantify its effects on complication incidence, unplanned readmission and patient quality of life.
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.