Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 944

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Patients' and Physicians' Attitudes Regarding the Disclosure of Medical Errors

Gallagher, Thomas H., Waterman, Amy D., Ebers, Alison G., Fraser, Victoria J., Levinson, Wendy·2003·JAMA

Abstract

Context: Despite the best efforts of health care practitioners, medical errors are inevitable. Disclosure of errors to patients is desired by patients and recommended by ethicists and professional organizations, but little is known about how patients and physicians think medical errors should be discussed. Objective: To determine patients' and physicians' attitudes about error disclosure. Design, Setting, and Participants: Thirteen focus groups were organized, including 6 groups of adult patients, 4 groups of academic and community physicians, and 3 groups of both physicians and patients. A total of 52 patients and 46 physicians participated. Main Outcome Measures: Qualitative analysis of focus group transcripts to determine the attitudes of patients and physicians about medical error disclosure; whether physicians disclose the information patients desire; and patients' and physicians' emotional needs when an error occurs and whether these needs are met. Results: Both patients and physicians had unmet needs following errors. Patients wanted disclosure of all harmful errors and sought information about what happened, why the error happened, how the error's consequences will be mitigated, and how recurrences will be prevented. Physicians agreed that harmful errors should be disclosed but "choose their words carefully" when telling patients about errors. Although physicians disclosed the adverse event, they often avoided stating that an error occurred, why the error happened, or how recurrences would be prevented. Patients also desired emotional support from physicians following errors, including an apology. However, physicians worried that an apology might create legal liability. Physicians were also upset when errors happen but were unsure where to seek emotional support. Conclusions: Physicians may not be providing the information or emotional support that patients seek following harmful medical errors. Physicians should strive to meet patients' desires for an apology and for information on the nature, cause, and prevention of errors. Institutions should also address the emotional needs of practitioners who are involved in medical errors.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.289.8.1001

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 944

Metadata

Authors
Gallagher, T. H., Waterman, A. D., Ebers, A. G., Fraser, V. J., & Levinson, W.
Venue
JAMA
Published
2003-02-26
Volume
289
Issue
8
Pages
1001
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W2146336228
Cited by
944
References
1
FWCI
61.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Patients' and Physicians' Attitudes Regarding the Disclosure of Medical Errors. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.289.8.1001
The paper
Gallagher, T. H., Waterman, A. D., Ebers, A. G., Fraser, V. J., & Levinson, W. (2003). Patients' and Physicians' Attitudes Regarding the Disclosure of Medical Errors. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.289.8.1001

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.