ArticleBMJ open2026
A relational tool supporting identity, inclusivity and impact in the intensive care unit: a qualitative study of the Footprints Project.
Article in BMJ open, 2026. 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
31 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe objective of this study was to understand experiences of patients, families and clinicians with the Footprints Project - a tool used to counter the unintentional dehumanisation of critically ill patients in the intensive care unit (ICU).
designQualitative descriptive study.
setting29-bed university-affiliated ICU.
participantsOf 66 participants, 7 were survivors of critical illness, 19 were family members of survivors or decedents and 40 were clinicians representing 10 different professions.
interventionsThe Footprints Project uses a written form to record personal details about each patient, then excerpts are transcribed onto a whiteboard in each patient's room. Patients and family members were invited to participate in semistructured interviews or focus groups after ICU discharge (October 2024-August 2025). Clinicians were invited by email (January 2025-May 2025). Focus groups and interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and anonymised. OUTCOME MEASURES: Perspectives and experiences of patients, family members and clinicians.
resultsData collection was primarily in-person for patients and families (17 of 26, 65.3%), and virtual for clinicians (36 of 40, 90.0%). Qualitative content analysis of transcripts revealed three categories related to
conclusionsThe Footprints Project was viewed as a relational tool, reflecting a patient-facing approach to person-centred, family-partnered care that supports humanism in healthcare. Future work should include structured implementation strategies and assess how Footprints can be sustained and embedded into practice.
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.