Towards an International Classification for Patient Safety: key concepts and terms
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Understanding the patient safety literature has been compromised by the inconsistent use of language. OBJECTIVE: To identify key concepts of relevance to the International Patient Safety Classification (ICPS) proposed by the World Alliance For Patient Safety of the World Health Organization (WHO), and agree on definitions and preferred terms. METHODS: Six principles were agreed upon-that the concepts and terms should: be applicable across the full spectrum of healthcare; be consistent with concepts from other WHO Classifications; have meanings as close as possible to those in colloquial use; convey the appropriate meanings with respect to patient safety; be brief and clear, without unnecessary or redundant qualifiers; be fit-for-purpose for the ICPS. RESULTS: Definitions and preferred terms were agreed for 48 concepts of relevance to the ICPS; these were described and the relationships between them and the ICPS were outlined. CONCLUSIONS: The consistent use of key concepts, definitions and preferred terms should pave the way for better understanding, for comparisons between facilities and jurisdictions, and for trends to be tracked over time. Changes and improvements, translation into other languages and alignment with other sets of patient safety definitions will be necessary. This work represents the start of an ongoing process of progressively improving a common international understanding of terms and concepts relevant to patient safety.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The ICPS framework is based upon existing classifications such as AIMS, with additional input from international experts in safety, systems engineering, health policy, medicine, and the law.
“The framework is based upon existing classifications such as AIMS, with additional input from international experts in safety, systems engineering, health policy, medicine, and the law.5 28 29”
From An analysis of computer-related patient safety incidents to inform the development of a classification (2010) · cites this paper as [5]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
“The Medical Journal of Australia”
(1923) · The Medical Journal of Australia · doi:10.5694/j.1326-5377.1923.tb64467.x · Cited by 1,549 · see citing works
Chang, A. (2005) · International Journal for Quality in Health Care · doi:10.1093/intqhc/mzi021 · Cited by 392 · see citing works
Towards an International Classification for Patient Safety: the conceptual framework
The World Alliance For Patient Safety Drafting Group, Sherman, H., Castro, G., Fletcher, M., on behalf of The World Alliance for Patient Safety, Hatlie, M., Hibbert, P., Jakob, R., Koss, R., Lewalle, P., et al. (2009) · International Journal for Quality in Health Care · doi:10.1093/intqhc/mzn054 · Cited by 281 · see citing works
Self-citationRunciman, W. B., Williamson, J. A. H., Deakin, A., Benveniste, K. A., Bannon, K., & Hibbert, P. D. (2006) · Quality in Health Care · doi:10.1136/qshc.2005.017467 · Cited by 156 · see citing works
Self-citationError, Blame, and the Law in Health Care—An Antipodean Perspective
Runciman, W. B., Merry, A., & Tito, F. (2003) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-138-12-200306170-00009 · Cited by 124 · see citing works
Self-citationMarx, D. A. (2003) · BMJ Quality & Safety · doi:10.1136/qhc.12.suppl_2.ii33 · Cited by 121 · see citing works
Towards an International Classification for Patient Safety: a Delphi survey
Thomson, R., Lewalle, P., Sherman, H., Hibbert, P., Runciman, W., & Castro, G. (2009) · International Journal for Quality in Health Care · doi:10.1093/intqhc/mzn055 · Cited by 87 · see citing works
Self-citationFMEA and RCA: the mantras; of modern risk management
Senders, J. W. (2004) · BMJ Quality & Safety · doi:10.1136/qshc.2004.010868 · Cited by 70 · see citing works
Shared meanings: preferred terms and definitions for safety and quality concepts
Runciman, W. B. (2006) · The Medical Journal of Australia · doi:10.5694/j.1326-5377.2006.tb00360.x · Cited by 62 · see citing works
Self-citationWhat do family physicians consider an error? A comparison of definitions and physician perception
Elder, N. C., Pallerla, H., & Regan, S. L. (2006) · BMC Family Practice · doi:10.1186/1471-2296-7-73 · Cited by 50 · see citing works
An Evaluation of Ventilator Monitoring Alarms
Myerson, K. R., Ilsley, A. H., & Runciman, W. B. (1986) · Anaesthesia and Intensive Care · doi:10.1177/0310057x8601400213 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- World Health Organization Preamble to the Constitution of the World Health Organization as adopted by the International Health Conference 19–22 June New York 1946; signed on 22 July 1946 by the representatives of 61 States (Official Records of the World Health Organization, no. 2, p. 100) and entered into force on 7 April 1948. www.who.int/en/
- Reason J Human Error 1990 New York Cambridge University Press
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Towards an International Classification for Patient Safety: the conceptual framework
The World Alliance For Patient Safety Drafting Group, Sherman, H., Castro, G., Fletcher, M., on behalf of The World Alliance for Patient Safety, Hatlie, M., Hibbert, P., Jakob, R., Koss, R., Lewalle, P., et al. (2009) · International Journal for Quality in Health Care · doi:10.1093/intqhc/mzn054 · Cited by 281 · see citing works
Self-citationKim, M. O., Coiera, E., & Magrabi, F. (2017) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1093/jamia/ocw154 · Cited by 263 · see citing works
Using FDA reports to inform a classification for health information technology safety problems
Magrabi, F., Ong, M.-S., Runciman, W., & Coiera, E. (2012) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1136/amiajnl-2011-000369 · Cited by 193 · see citing works
Self-citationMagrabi, F., Ong, M.-S., Runciman, W., & Coiera, E. (2010) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1136/jamia.2009.002444 · Cited by 162 · see citing works
Self-citationThe missing evidence: a systematic review of patients' experiences of adverse events in health care
Harrison, R., Walton, M., Manias, E., Smith–Merry, J., Kelly, P., Iedema, R., & Robinson, L. (2015) · International Journal for Quality in Health Care · doi:10.1093/intqhc/mzv075 · Cited by 134 · see citing works
Towards an International Classification for Patient Safety: a Delphi survey
Thomson, R., Lewalle, P., Sherman, H., Hibbert, P., Runciman, W., & Castro, G. (2009) · International Journal for Quality in Health Care · doi:10.1093/intqhc/mzn055 · Cited by 87 · see citing works
Self-citationDriesen, B. E. J. M., van Riet, B. H. G., Verkerk, L., Bonjer, H. J., Merten, H., & Nanayakkara, P. W. B. (2018) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0202751 · Cited by 85 · see citing works
Rahman Jabin, M. S., Steen, M., Wepa, D., & Bergman, P. (2023) · DIGITAL HEALTH · doi:10.1177/20552076231174307 · Cited by 44 · see citing works
Jabin, M. S. R., Pan, D., & Nilsson, E. (2024) · Frontiers in Digital Health · doi:10.3389/fdgth.2024.1260521 · Cited by 41 · see citing works
- Authors
- Runciman, W., Hibbert, P., Thomson, R., Van Der Schaaf, T., Sherman, H., & Lewalle, P.
- Affiliations
- Royal Adelaide Hospital (AU)
- National Patient Safety Agency (GB)
- Newcastle University (GB)
- Joint Commission (US)
- World Health Organization (CH)
- Corresponding author
- Runciman, W.
- Venue
- International Journal for Quality in Health Care
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2009-02-01
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 18-26
- ISSN
- 1353-4505 (ISSN-L)
- 1464-3677
- PMC
- PMC2638755
- OpenAlex
- W2104731468
- Cited by
- 647
- References
- 11
- Citations by year
- 2026: 19 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 32 · 2023: 47 · 2022: 48 · 2021: 57 · 2020: 44 · 2019: 58 · 2018: 31 · 2017: 48 · 2016: 42 · 2015: 52 · 2014: 32 · 2013: 33 · 2012: 28
- FWCI
- 38.76
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- International Journal for Quality in Health Care (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- TU/e Research Portal (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- TU/e Research Portal (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- TU/e Research Portal (submittedVersion)
- Document Server@UHasselt (UHasselt) (submittedVersion)
- UniSA Research Outputs Repository (University of South Australia) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- Newcastle University ePrints (Newcastle Univesity)
- Funders
- World Health Organization
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Emergency Medical Services › Patient Safety and Medication Errors
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Healthcare Quality and Management
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Medical Coding and Health Information
- Keywords
- patient safety, terminology, definitions, concept classification, terminology standardization, World Alliance for Patient Safety
- MeSH terms
- Concept Formation, Delivery of Health Care, International Cooperation, Terminology as Topic, Surveys and Questionnaires, Safety Management, Medical Errors
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
