The DOI matches its Crossref record; 27 of the 27 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Transparency When Things Go Wrong: Physician Attitudes About Reporting Medical Errors to Patients, Peers, and Institutions
Open accessAbstract
Objectives: Transparent communication after medical error includes disclosing the mistake to the patient, discussing the event with colleagues, and reporting to the institution. Little is known about whether attitudes about these transparency practices are related. Understanding these relationships could inform educational and organizational strategies to promote transparency. Methods: We analyzed responses of 3038 US and Canadian physicians to a medical error communication survey. We used bivariate correlations, principal components analysis, and linear regression to determine whether and how physician attitudes about transparent communication with patients, peers, and the institution after error were related. Results: Physician attitudes about disclosing errors to patients, peers, and institutions were correlated (all P's < 0.001) and represented 2 principal components analysis factors, namely, communication with patients and communication with peers/institution. Predictors of attitudes supporting transparent communication with patients and peers/institution included female sex, US (vs Canadian) doctors, academic (vs private) practice, the belief that disclosure decreased likelihood of litigation, and the belief that system changes occur after error reporting. In addition, younger physicians, surgeons, and those with previous experience disclosing a serious error were more likely to agree with disclosure to patients. In comparison, doctors who believed that disclosure would decrease patient trust were less likely to agree with error disclosure to patients. Previous disclosure education was associated with attitudes supporting greater transparency with peers/institution. Conclusions: Physician attitudes about discussing errors with patients, colleagues, and institutions are related. Several predictors of transparency affect all 3 practices and are potentially modifiable by educational and institutional strategies.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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 source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Moreover, due to the fear of undermining professional relationships, specialists frequently do not report diagnostic errors.”
From Toward Safer Diagnoses: A SEIPS-Based Narrative Review of Diagnostic Errors (2026) · cites this paper as [254]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“For example, when a specialist discovers an error, they often avoid reporting it to the original specialist or making referrals about it [254,255].”
From Toward Safer Diagnoses: A SEIPS-Based Narrative Review of Diagnostic Errors (2026) · cites this paper as [254]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
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
Five Years After To Err Is Human
Leape, L. L., & Berwick, D. M. (2005) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.293.19.2384 · Cited by 1,264
Patients' and Physicians' Attitudes Regarding the Disclosure of Medical Errors
Gallagher, T. H., Waterman, A. D., Ebers, A. G., Fraser, V. J., & Levinson, W. S. (2003) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.289.8.1001 · Cited by 944
Self-citationLeape, L. L. (2002) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmnejmhpr011493 · Cited by 838
Views of Practicing Physicians and the Public on Medical Errors
Blendon, R. J., DesRoches, C. M., Brodie, M., Benson, J. M., Rosen, A. B., Schneider, E. C., Altman, D. E., Zapert, K., Herrmann, M. J., & Steffenson, A. E. (2002) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmsa022151 · Cited by 770
Transforming healthcare: a safety imperative
Leape, L. L., Berwick, D. M., Clancy, C. M., Conway, J., Gluck, P., Guest, J., Lawrence, D., Morath, J. M., O’Leary, D. S., O’Neill, P., et al. (2009) · BMJ Quality & Safety · doi:10.1136/qshc.2009.036954 · Cited by 486
Patient Safety At Ten: Unmistakable Progress, Troubling Gaps
Wachter, R. M. (2009) · Health Affairs · doi:10.1377/hlthaff.2009.0785 · Cited by 401
Liability Claims and Costs Before and After Implementation of a Medical Error Disclosure Program
Kachalia, A. B., Kaufman, S. R., Boothman, R., Anderson, S., Welch, K., Saint, S., & Rogers, M. A. M. (2010) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-153-4-201008170-00002 · Cited by 354
The End Of The Beginning: Patient Safety Five Years After ‘To Err Is Human’
Wachter, R. M. (2004) · Health Affairs · doi:10.1377/hlthaff.w4.534 · Cited by 282
Hilfiker, D. (1984) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm198401123100211 · Cited by 277
Gallagher, T. H., Garbutt, J. M., Waterman, A. D., Flum, D. R., Larson, E. B., Waterman, B. M., Dunagan, W. C., Fraser, V. J., & Levinson, W. S. (2006) · Archives of Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/archinte.166.15.1585 · Cited by 260
Self-citation
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- National Quality Forum Safe Practices for Better Healthcare - 2010 Update
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Management of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Complications
Doll, J. A., Hira, R. S., Kearney, K. E., Kandzari, D. E., Riley, R. F., Marso, S. P., Grantham, J. A., Thompson, C. A., McCabe, J. M., Karmpaliotis, D. I., et al. (2020) · Circulation Cardiovascular Interventions · doi:10.1161/circinterventions.120.008962 · Cited by 110
Taking complaints seriously: using the patient safety lens
Gallagher, T. H., & Mazor, K. M. (2015) · BMJ Quality & Safety · doi:10.1136/bmjqs-2015-004337 · Cited by 90
Self-citationBirgand, G., Castro‐Sánchez, E., Hansen, S., Gastmeier, P., Lucet, J., Ferlie, E. B., Holmes, A. H., & Ahmad, R. (2018) · Antimicrobial Resistance and Infection Control · doi:10.1186/s13756-018-0321-5 · Cited by 73
Mansour, R. A., Ammar, K., Al-Tabba, A., Arawi, T. A., Mansour, A. H., & Al-Hussaini, M. A. (2020) · BMC Medical Ethics · doi:10.1186/s12910-020-00513-2 · Cited by 25
Enhancing patient safety by integrating ethical dimensions to Critical Incident Reporting Systems
Wehkamp, K., Kuhn, E. M., Petzina, R., Buyx, A., & Rogge, A. (2021) · BMC Medical Ethics · doi:10.1186/s12910-021-00593-8 · Cited by 22
Metadata
- Authors
- Bell, S. K., White, A. A., Yi, J. C., Yi-Frazier, J. P., & Gallagher, T. H.
- Affiliations
- Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (US)
- From the *Department of Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA; †Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA; ‡Clinical Research Division, Biobehavioral Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; §Department of Pediatrics, School of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA; and ∥Seattle Children's Research Institute, Seattle, WA.
- Corresponding author
- Bell, Sigall K.
- Venue
- Journal of Patient Safety
- Published
- 2017-12
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 243-248
- ISSN
- 1549-8417 (ISSN-L)
- 1549-8425
- OpenAlex
- W1995708169
- Cited by
- 52
- References
- 27
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 2
- FWCI
- 11.50
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- Locations
- Journal of Patient Safety (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Arnold P. Gold Foundation
- Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (R01HS016506)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Patient Safety and Medication Errors
- Social Sciences › Law › Medical Malpractice and Liability Issues
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
- Keywords
- medical error disclosure, transparency, physician attitudes, patient disclosure, peer-to-peer communication, institutional reporting, medical error reporting, patient trust, litigation risk, academic vs private practice, sex differences
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Communication, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Physician-Patient Relations, Physicians, Surveys and Questionnaires, Truth Disclosure, Medical Errors, Young Adult
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
