Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40161311›Full record

ArticleJournal of patient experience2025

Direct Observation of Family Engagement Practice in a Cardiovascular Intensive Care Unit.

Jillian Kifell, Douglas Slobod, Krystina B Lewis, Michael Goldfarb

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of patient experience, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Jillian KifellDivision of Experimental Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0006-2009-4114
Douglas SlobodDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, McGill University Health Centre, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7708-8034
Krystina B LewisSchool of Nursing, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Michael GoldfarbDivision of Experimental Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9790-1232

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to describe family engagement practices in a cardiovascular intensive care unit (CVICU) and to explore their relationship with patient outcomes. Observations were conducted on 104 patients, with most (n = 61; 58%) having family members present. On average, 1.3 ± 0.6 family members were present per observation period per patient, spending 69% of the observation time at the bedside. The most common forms of family engagement included communication (n = 61; 100%), active family presence (n = 36; 59%), and direct contribution to care (n = 35; 57%). Patients with family present were 3 times less likely to be re-admitted to the hospital within 30 days compared to those without family present (5% vs 16%;

Indexed as

cardiologyfamily-centered carefamily engagementintensive care unitpatient experiencepatient outcomespatient/relationship-centered

Identifiers

PMID40161311
PMCPMC11951910

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.