ArticleInternational journal of nursing studies advances2025
Co-designing interventions to improve emergency department discharge communication with youths, parents and healthcare providers: a process evaluation.
Article in International journal of nursing studies advances, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Usability testing of two co-designed discharge communication tools for use in pediatric emergency departments: findings from the EDUCATE study.BMC pediatrics · 2026Article
- Content, implementation, and evaluation of capacity-strengthening initiatives for public and patient involvement in mental health research: a scoping review protocol informed by implementation science.HRB open research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Emergency departments (ED) are imperfect environments for information exchange. Communication interventions at discharge can lower readmission rates and improve adherence to follow-up. However, these interventions are rarely designed in partnership with ED clinicians, youth and their parents. Objective: To describe a theory-based co-design methodology and corresponding process evaluation to improve discharge communication for two common ED presentations: asthma and minor head injury. Methods: Eligible participants were clinicians who worked in a pediatric ED and parents and youth (aged 12-17) with recent ED experience for either presentation. Co-design teams followed a structured meeting process guided by the Behaviour Change Wheel to facilitate priority setting and intervention design. Process data was captured through meeting recordings, surveys and exit interviews. Quantitative data was analyzed using descriptive statistics and qualitative data through thematic analysis. Results: Each co-design team included eight members ( Conclusions: A theory-based co-design approach provided a useful structure to partner with youth, parents and ED clinicians to develop discharge communication tools. Consideration is needed when scheduling the timing and length of the co-design meetings to account for the schedules of both service providers and users.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.