ArticleRisk management and healthcare policy2025
Evaluation of Medical Device Aging and Replacement Decisions within Hospital Environments: A User-Centered Approach.
Article in Risk management and healthcare policy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Development and Psychometric Evaluation of the Nursing Management Capacity Scale for Poststroke Dysphagia Based on the Donabedian Model.Journal of nursing management · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study aims to evaluate the factors influencing medical device replacement decisions from a user-centered perspective: medical technicians, engineers, and healthcare professionals. We seek to prioritize criteria for medical device replacement and develop feasible strategies applicable to real-world healthcare settings. Methods: This analysis was conducted by reviewing previous studies to identify the key factors in medical device replacements. The key variables were selected from the review, and the significant factors for analysis were determined. Results: An analytic hierarchy process (AHP) analysis was used to compare and analyze the priority of medical device replacement, which revealed that clinical factors emerged as the crucial in medical device replacement decisions. Additionally, unlike medical technicians, doctors, nurses, and pharmacists, for whom clinical factors are the primary considerations when replacing medical devices, safety is the most important factor for medical engineers. Conclusion: Medical device obsolescence significantly affects patient safety and healthcare operations. Therefore, the maintenance plans for medical devices should focus on clinical factors. Moreover, a more systematic medical device replacement system must be established, prioritizing the factors according to the occupations of medical workers.
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.