↓ Skip to main content

Michigan Publishing

Formative evaluation of the video reflexive ethnography method, as applied to the physician–nurse dyad

Overview of attention for article published in BMJ Quality & Safety, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#18 of 2,552)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
60 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
13 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
71 Mendeley
Title
Formative evaluation of the video reflexive ethnography method, as applied to the physician–nurse dyad
Published in
BMJ Quality & Safety, July 2018
DOI 10.1136/bmjqs-2017-007728
Pubmed ID
Authors

Milisa Manojlovich, Richard M Frankel, Molly Harrod, Alaa Heshmati, Timothy Hofer, Elizabeth Umberfield, Sarah Krein

Abstract

Despite decades of research and interventions, poor communication between physicians and nurses continues to be a primary contributor to adverse events in the hospital setting and a major challenge to improving patient safety. The lack of progress suggests that it is time to consider alternative approaches with greater potential to identify and improve communication than those used to date. We conducted a formative evaluation to assess the feasibility, acceptability and utility of using video reflexive ethnography (VRE) to examine, and potentially improve, communication between nurses and physicians. We begin with a brief description of the institutional review boardapproval process and recruitment activities, then explain how we conducted the formative evaluation by describing (1) the VRE process itself; (2) our assessment of the exposure to the VRE process; and (3) challenges encountered and lessons learnt as a result of the process, along with suggestions for change. Our formative evaluation demonstrates that it is feasible and acceptable to video-record communication between physicians and nurses during patient care rounds across many units at a large, academic medical centre. The lessons that we learnt helped to identify procedural changes for future projects. We also discuss the broader application of this methodology as a possible strategy for improving other important quality and safety practices in healthcare settings. The VRE process did generate increased reflection in both nurse and physician participants. Moreover, VRE has utility in assessing communication and, based on the comments of our participants, can serve as an intervention to possibly improve communication, with implications for patient safety.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 71 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 15%
Student > Bachelor 9 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 11%
Student > Master 7 10%
Professor 6 8%
Other 18 25%
Unknown 12 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 19 27%
Medicine and Dentistry 15 21%
Social Sciences 6 8%
Computer Science 3 4%
Arts and Humanities 3 4%
Other 11 15%
Unknown 14 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 479. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 January 2020.
All research outputs
#55,717
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from BMJ Quality & Safety
#18
of 2,552 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,174
of 340,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMJ Quality & Safety
#2
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,552 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 340,123 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.