Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 374

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Patient safety in developing countries: retrospective estimation of scale and nature of harm to patients in hospital

Open access
Wilson, R. M., Michel, P., Olsen, S., Gibberd, R. W., Vincent, C., El-Assady, R., Rasslan, O., Qsous, S., Macharia, W. M., Sahel, A., Whittaker, S., Abdo-Ali, M., Letaief, M., Ahmed, N. A., Abdellatif, A., Larizgoitia, I., for the WHO Patient Safety EMRO/AFRO Working group·2012·BMJ

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess the frequency and nature of adverse events to patients in selected hospitals in developing or transitional economies. DESIGN: Retrospective medical record review of hospital admissions during 2005 in eight countries. SETTING: Ministries of Health of Egypt, Jordan, Kenya, Morocco, Tunisia, Sudan, South Africa and Yemen; the World Health Organisation (WHO) Eastern Mediterranean and African Regions (EMRO and AFRO), and WHO Patient Safety. PARTICIPANTS: Convenience sample of 26 hospitals from which 15,548 patient records were randomly sampled. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Two stage screening. Initial screening based on 18 explicit criteria. Records that screened positive were then reviewed by a senior physician for determination of adverse event, its preventability, and the resulting disability. RESULTS: Of the 15,548 records reviewed, 8.2% showed at least one adverse event, with a range of 2.5% to 18.4% per country. Of these events, 83% were judged to be preventable, while about 30% were associated with death of the patient. About 34% adverse events were from therapeutic errors in relatively non-complex clinical situations. Inadequate training and supervision of clinical staff or the failure to follow policies or protocols contributed to most events. CONCLUSIONS: Unsafe patient care represents a serious and considerable danger to patients in the hospitals that were studied, and hence should be a high priority public health problem. Many other developing and transitional economies will probably share similar rates of harm and similar contributory factors. The convenience sampling of hospitals might limit the interpretation of results, but the identified adverse event rates show an estimate that should stimulate and facilitate the urgent institution of appropriate remedial action and also to trigger more research. Prevention of these adverse events will be complex and involves improving basic clinical processes and does not simply depend on the provision of more resources.

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 · 10.1136/bmj.e832

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.

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

Cited by

See all 374

Metadata

Authors
Wilson, R. M., Michel, P., Olsen, S., Gibberd, R. W., Vincent, C., El-Assady, R., Rasslan, O., Qsous, S., Macharia, W. M., Sahel, A., Whittaker, S., Abdo-Ali, M., Letaief, M., Ahmed, N. A., Abdellatif, A., Larizgoitia, I., & for the WHO Patient Safety EMRO/AFRO Working group
Venue
BMJ
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2012-03-13
Volume
344
Issue
mar13 3
Pages
e832-e832
ISSN
  • 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
  • 0959-8138
  • 1468-5833
OpenAlex
W2033466722
Cited by
374
References
0
FWCI
36.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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: Patient safety in developing countries: retrospective estimation of scale and nature of harm to patients in hospital. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/bmj.e832
The paper
Wilson, R. M., Michel, P., Olsen, S., Gibberd, R. W., Vincent, C., El-Assady, R., Rasslan, O., Qsous, S., Macharia, W. M., Sahel, A., Whittaker, S., Abdo-Ali, M., Letaief, M., Ahmed, N. A., Abdellatif, A., Larizgoitia, I., & for the WHO Patient Safety EMRO/AFRO Working group. (2012). Patient safety in developing countries: retrospective estimation of scale and nature of harm to patients in hospital. BMJ. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.e832

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.