ArticleRevista brasileira de enfermagem2025
Risk for shock in people with acute myocardial infarction: a middle-range theory.
Article in Revista brasileira de enfermagem, 2025. 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
objectivesto develop a middle-range theory for the risk for shock in people with acute myocardial infarction.
methodstheoretical-causal validity of the nursing diagnosis "Risk for shock" in people with acute myocardial infarction, based on a middle-range theory. The study followed six stages: definition of the approach for theory construction; definition of conceptual models; definition of main concepts; development of pictorial diagram; construction of propositions; establishment of causal relationships and evidence for practice.
resultsthree essential attributes were identified, 23 clinical antecedents related to the risk for shock, eight theoretical propositions were formulated, and causal relationships were established between the identified stimuli and the essential attributes.
conclusionsthe theory developed established relationships between theory and practice based on the establishment of propositions and causal relationships that allow nurses' diagnostic reasoning.
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.