ArticleBMC nursing2025
Neurosurgical nurses' perspectives of patient-reported outcomes: a qualitative study.
Article in BMC nursing, 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.
- Research progress on the application of Kawakita Jiro Method in nursing field.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Nurses' perspectives on the implementation of patient-reported outcomes: a descriptive qualitative study.BMC nursing · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatient-reported outcomes (PROs) are critical in neurosurgical care for addressing post-discharge unmet needs (e.g., pain, functional impairments), yet traditional assessment models often neglect subjective experiences. Although PROs integrate patient perspectives with clinical indicators, improving diagnosis and care, significant variations exist in nurses’ understanding of PROs, potentially hindering implementation. This study explores neurosurgical nurses’ perspectives and experiences to inform a Nurse-led PROs System.
methodUsing purposive sampling, 15 neurosurgical nurses from two institutions participated in offline semi-structured interviews between December 2024 and January 2025. Interviews (30–60 minutes) explored PROs awareness, barriers, and application in practice. Data were transcribed verbatim and analyzed via the Kawakita Jiro (KJ) method to identify thematic patterns. Ethical approval was obtained (Lun Audit [2024] 222).
resultsThematic saturation was reached after 15 interviews.The study identified six themes: (1) Prevailing challenges; (2) Cognitive level; (3) Patients’ medical experience; (4) Impact factors; (5) System support; (6) The ‘Shared decision-making discharge’ Model.
conclusionsTo address PROs implementation gaps, senior management must prioritize nurse training, digital infrastructure, and multidisciplinary collaboration. A Nurse-led PROs System should standardize post-discharge assessments, while the proposed “Shared Decision-Making Discharge” model could bridge patient-provider communication gaps. Future studies should test this model’s impact on care quality. CLINICAL TRAIL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.