Conectar
Biomarkers related to the diagnosis, prognosis and treatment of dementia will play a key role in future clinical practice. The overarching aim of the ODIN (blood and cerebrospinal fluid) Biobank is to study biomarkers for dementia and contribute to the transition from cerebrospinal fluid to blood-based biomarkers.
ODIN recruited 451 patients (median age 74 years, 53% females) referred to the Department of Neurology at Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark, for diagnostic assessment of dementia. Enrolment started in March 2020 and ended in July 2025. Patients referred for a lumbar puncture were eligible for inclusion. Cerebrospinal fluid and blood samples (plasma, serum and buffy coat) were stored at –80°C. Information about sociodemographic, educational level, dementia subtype, cognitive test scores, neuroimaging results, hypertension, diabetes, height, weight, alcohol consumption and smoking was collected.
The most frequent diagnoses were Alzheimer’s disease (n=268, 59%), frontotemporal dementia (n=26, 5.8%) and mixed Alzheimer’s and vascular disease (n=23, 5.1%). N=82 (18%) were cognitively unimpaired or had mild cognitive impairment but not dementia. The median Mini–Mental State Examination score was 23 (IQR: 20–26) and the median Addenbrooke’s Cognitive Examination score was 68 (IQR: 58–77).
ODIN will contribute to the development, validation and implementation of new biomarkers related to diagnosis, prognosis and treatment of dementia. Furthermore, the cohort will assist the transition from cerebrospinal fluid to blood-based biomarkers.
To explore how patients experience, interpret, and respond to missed nursing care during hospitalization in a Danish hospital context.
A qualitative design was employed.
Individual semi-structured interviews were conducted with fifteen patients who had been admitted to medical or surgical wards at a Danish university hospital. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.
The overarching theme, ‘Nursing care experienced through a filter of empathy and understanding’, captured how patients perceived omissions and delays as understandable responses to systemic pressures rather than neglect. Although they experienced missed nursing care, patients rationalized these omissions as inevitable, adapting to organizational constraints with empathy toward nurses, awareness of workload pressures, and a wish not to be a burden. Three subthemes illustrated this process: ‘Not wanting to be a burden: negotiating physical needs’, ‘Moderating expectations: the subtle importance of psychosocial care’ and ‘Waiting patiently: a sense of shared responsibility for timely care’.
Patients' empathy and adaptation sometimes obscured unmet needs and contributed to the normalization of missed nursing care. Missed nursing care thus emerged as a relational, co-constructed phenomenon shaped by both system pressures and patients' efforts to avoid burdening nursing staff.
Reducing missed nursing care requires action beyond staffing, addressing relational and cultural dimensions across clinical, organizational and policy levels through proactive, person-centered approaches.
By foregrounding patients' perspectives, this study reframes missed nursing care as co-constructed by both system constraints and patient adaptations, offering new insight to guide policy, leadership, and practice efforts toward more responsive and person-centered nursing care.
Reporting followed the consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research.
Patients contributed as interview participants but were not involved in the design, conduct, or reporting of the study.
To identify and synthesise qualitative evidence on nurses' perceptions of reasons for missed nursing care in hospitals.
Systematic review of qualitative evidence.
An extensive search of all relevant databases was conducted. Study selection, quality assessment, data extraction and meta-aggregation were performed independently by two reviewers according to the JBI guidelines for systematic reviews of qualitative evidence. Confidence in the findings was assessed using the ConQual approach.
The electronic databases CINAHL, PubMed, Embase, PsychInfo, and Scopus were searched in January 2024 and repeated in May 2025.
Thirty-one studies from hospital settings worldwide were included following critical appraisal, with overall quality rated moderate to high. The studies contributed 168 findings, which were organised into 10 categories and three synthesised findings: Organisational and system-level factors influencing missed nursing care, Teamwork and cultural factors influencing missed nursing care, and Individual nurse- and patient-related factors influencing missed nursing care.
Reasons for missed nursing care represent an interplay of systemic, organisational, and individual factors within complex resource-constrained contexts.
Healthcare organisations are recommended to implement system-level interventions, rather than relying solely on behaviour-focused solutions. Healthcare leaders should ensure flexible staffing, strong managerial support, and adequate resources to enable fundamental care. Building collaborative, interprofessional cultures that value relational and fundamental care as well as technical tasks is essential, together with education and mentorship that support nurses' decision-making, resilience, and clinical competence.
Hospital leaders, policymakers, and nurse managers can use the recommendations to reduce missed nursing care and promote a safe person-centred practice. Implementing systemic changes will improve nurses' working conditions and capacity to deliver comprehensive care, ultimately enhancing patient satisfaction and outcomes.
The ‘enhancing transparency in reporting the synthesis of qualitative research statement’.
No patient or public involvement.
The review is registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews. PROSPERO CRD42023438198 (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/search)
To examine how the population composition, practice organisation and geographical context of general practice clinics are associated with unwarranted variation in prescribing patterns (variation not explained by patient characteristics), using potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) as an indicator of treatment quality.
A nationwide register-based cohort study.
Data on eligible general practice clinics (1703 clinics) in Denmark and their listed patient populations (4 369 915 individuals) were collected from 1 January to 31 December 2021.
Unwarranted variation in PIM was estimated using the clinics’ PIM propensity. PIM propensity in clinics was defined as the ratio between observed and expected PIM incidence among listed patients and was stratified into indicators of underprescribing and overprescribing.
The results demonstrate a 13% difference in PIM propensity between clinics with the highest propensity (90th percentile) and the lowest propensity (10th percentile). When stratifying by underprescribing and overprescribing, we found a relative difference of 12% for underprescribing and 50% for overprescribing between the two groups. Clinics serving male-dominated populations (>55% men 1.11, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.14) and more socially deprived patient populations (deprivation index >40 10.11, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.14) had a higher propensity for overprescribing. Organisational factors associated with overprescribing included single-handed practices (1.08, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.10), smaller patient lists (100 000 citizens: 1.04, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.07). In contrast, disease burden and age distribution in listed patients appeared to have no clinically relevant association with PIM propensity.
This study indicates unwarranted variation in the medical treatment quality, primarily related to overprescribing. Inferior treatment quality was associated with patient composition, practice organisation and geographical context. This emphasises a need for new strategies to address the inverse care law and enhance patient safety.
To describe the development and refinement of the Flinders Fundamentals of Care Assessment Tool for Clinical Practice through stakeholder feedback. The tool, based on the Fundamentals of Care Framework, supports healthcare leaders and clinicians in assessing fundamental care in a practical and user-friendly manner that embraces rather than minimises the inherent complexity of this care delivery as it occurs in practice.
Multi-method study informed by participatory action principles.
Data collection involved an anonymous online survey and cognitive interviews with key stakeholders internationally to gauge perspectives on the clarity, usability, and acceptability of the tool. Data were collected between October–December 2023. Quantitative, categorical data were analysed using descriptive statistics. Qualitative data were analysed via content analysis.
Participants described the Tool as Comprehensive, Practical, and Useful. Participants liked the visual representation of results in the form of bar and radar diagrams, which aided in interpreting the outcomes. The main suggestions for improvement were: (1) Simplifying items relating to the ‘Context of Care’ dimension of the Fundamentals of Care Framework; (2) Reducing similarity between some items; (3) Separating or simplifying items with multiple components; and (4) Clarifying terminology.
Based on stakeholder feedback, the Flinders Fundamentals of Care Assessment Tool for Clinical Practice is now digitised and includes a comprehensive instruction manual and definitions for each element of the Fundamentals of Care Framework assessed within the tool. The tool supports healthcare leaders and clinicians to assess fundamental care delivery at multiple levels—individual, team, unit/ward, organisational—identifying areas of strength and improvement to inform decision-making, planning, and quality improvement. The tool offers a way of assessing fundamental care holistically as a multi-dimensional construct rather than as a series of disaggregated tasks, better reflecting and capturing the complex reality of fundamental care delivery.
The Flinders Fundamentals of Care Assessment Tool for Clinical Practice supports real-time feedback (i.e., immediate visualisation of results), facilitating its integration in clinical practice to support enhanced fundamental care delivery.
Seeking stakeholder feedback has enhanced the relevance, acceptability, and feasibility of the Flinders Fundamentals of Care Assessment Tool for Clinical Practice, facilitating its use as a decision-making and planning tool to support improved fundamental care delivery across clinical settings.
This study is reported using the CROSS and SRQR guidelines.
No Patient or Public Contribution.
To identify the prevalence and types of missed nursing care in a Danish hospital context from patients' perspectives and to examine associations between missed nursing care, patient demographics, and patient-reported adverse events.
Cross-sectional study.
A total of 284 medical and surgical patients from 21 wards at a Danish university hospital completed the Danish version of the MISSCARE Survey–Patient. Descriptive statistics and analyses of associations between missed nursing care and patient demographics and adverse events were conducted.
Patients reported an overall prevalence of missed nursing care of 15%, with most omissions occurring in the physical care domain (22%), followed by psychosocial care (13%) and timeliness (6%). The most frequently missed activities included oral care, clarity about which nurse was responsible for their care, repositioning in bed, and help with eating. Medication errors were significantly associated with higher missed nursing care scores across all domains, while associations with other adverse events and demographics were inconsistent.
Patients generally perceived a low prevalence of missed nursing care, although notable variations were observed across care domains and specific activities. Incorporating patient perspectives alongside nurse perspectives offers a more complete understanding of missed nursing care.
Continuous assessment of missed nursing care from patients' perspectives could serve as a valuable complement to nurse-reported assessments, helping to identify specific areas for improvement. Targeted interventions addressing activities with higher patient-reported missed nursing care may enhance both care quality and patient outcomes.
STROBE guidelines were followed.
Patients were not involved in the study's design, conduct, or reporting.
This study highlights missed nursing care from patients' perspectives, revealing key care gaps. The findings can inform hospital administrators, nursing leaders, nursing educators, and policymakers in developing strategies to improve care quality and patient satisfaction.
To translate, cross-culturally adapt, validate and psychometrically test the MISSCARE Survey–Patient for assessing patients' perspectives on missed nursing care (MNC) in a Danish hospital setting.
A two-phase cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric validation study.
The study was conducted in two phases. First, the MISSCARE Survey–Patient was cross-culturally adapted to ensure its relevance in a Danish hospital context. This phase involved translation and back-translation, expert committee reviews and cognitive interviews with 18 inpatients to establish content validity. Second, a convenience sample of 284 patients from surgical and medical departments completed the adapted survey. Psychometric properties were evaluated using structural equation modelling to test a second-order formative model.
The cross-cultural adaptation phase led to minor and substantial revisions, including the addition of six new items to enhance content validity. These items addressed aspects of nursing care relevant to patients in the contemporary hospital setting that were not captured by the original survey. Structural equation modelling confirmed the second-order formative model and demonstrated robust psychometric properties.
The MISSCARE Survey–Patient was successfully adapted and validated for use in Danish hospitals, ensuring strong content validity and psychometric robustness.
The Danish version of the survey provides a valuable tool for assessing MNC from patients' perspectives in hospital settings. Its use can help identify specific areas where nursing care falls short, guiding targeted initiatives to enhance care quality and patient safety. By integrating patients' experiences into quality improvement initiatives, the survey supports the development of more person-centred care practices.
The study adhered to the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments reporting guideline for studies on measurement properties of patient-reported outcome measures.
Patients were not involved in the study's design, conduct, or reporting.
The Danish version of the survey facilitates data collection on patients' perspectives of MNC in contemporary hospital settings, providing valuable insights into care quality. By offering a validated tool to assess MNC from patients' perspectives, the survey helps hospitals identify care gaps, prioritise improvement efforts and enhance person-centred care.
FreshRSS 