CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 311Patient Safety and Medication ErrorsHospital Admissions and OutcomesHealthcare Quality and Management

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 126 of the 129 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Development of an evidence-based framework of factors contributing to patient safety incidents in hospital settings: a systematic review

Open access
Lawton, Rebecca, McEachan, Rosemary R C, Giles, Sally J, Sirriyeh, Reema, Watt, Ian S, Wright, John·2012·BMJ Quality & Safety
DOI 10.1136/bmjqs-2011-000443PMC PMC3332004
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this systematic review was to develop a 'contributory factors framework' from a synthesis of empirical work which summarises factors contributing to patient safety incidents in hospital settings. DESIGN: A mixed-methods systematic review of the literature was conducted. DATA SOURCES: Electronic databases (Medline, PsycInfo, ISI Web of knowledge, CINAHL and EMBASE), article reference lists, patient safety websites, registered study databases and author contacts. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Studies were included that reported data from primary research in secondary care aiming to identify the contributory factors to error or threats to patient safety. RESULTS: 1502 potential articles were identified. 95 papers (representing 83 studies) which met the inclusion criteria were included, and 1676 contributory factors extracted. Initial coding of contributory factors by two independent reviewers resulted in 20 domains (eg, team factors, supervision and leadership). Each contributory factor was then coded by two reviewers to one of these 20 domains. The majority of studies identified active failures (errors and violations) as factors contributing to patient safety incidents. Individual factors, communication, and equipment and supplies were the other most frequently reported factors within the existing evidence base. CONCLUSIONS: This review has culminated in an empirically based framework of the factors contributing to patient safety incidents. This framework has the potential to be applied across hospital settings to improve the identification and prevention of factors that cause harm to patients.

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/bmjqs-2011-000443

Cites

126 of 126 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1 Flow chart of search strategy and included studies.
Figure 1 Flow chart of search strategy and included studies.CC BY-NC · PubMed Central
Figure 2 The Yorkshire contributory factors framework.
Figure 2 The Yorkshire contributory factors framework.CC BY-NC · PubMed Central

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

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?

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 129 references

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. 10.1111/j.1744-1609.2008.00117.x · DOI
  2. Itoh K Andersen HB . Causes of medical errors as perceived by patients and healthcare staff. In: Aven T Vinnem JE , eds. Risk, Reliability and Societal Safety. Oxford: Taylor & Francis, 2007:179–85.
  3. 10.1111/j.1365-2044.1996.tb07841.x · DOI
  4. 10.1136/qshc.2003.009100 · DOI
  5. Watt I Birks Y Entwistle V . A Review of Strategies to Promote Patient Involvement, a Study to Explore Patient's Views and Attitudes and a Pilot Study to Evaluate the Acceptability of Selected Patient Involvement Strategies. York: University of York, 2009.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–300 of 308

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Lawton, R., McEachan, R. R. C., Giles, S. J., Sirriyeh, R., Watt, I. S., & Wright, J.
Affiliations
  • University of Leeds (GB)
  • Bradford Royal Infirmary (GB)
  • University of York (GB)
Corresponding author
Lawton, Rebecca
ORCID
Venue
BMJ Quality & Safety
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2012-03-15
Volume
21
Issue
5
Pages
369-380
ISSN
  • 1475-3898 (ISSN-L)
  • 2044-5415
  • 2044-5423
DOI
10.1136/bmjqs-2011-000443
PMC
PMC3332004
OpenAlex
W2164086521
Cited by
311
References
129
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 34 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 31 · 2018: 28 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 24 · 2015: 27 · 2014: 23 · 2013: 15
FWCI
5.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc
Locations
  • BMJ Quality & Safety (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
Funders
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research (RP-PG-0108-10049)
  • Programme Grants for Applied Research (RP-PG-0108-10049)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Patient Safety and Medication Errors
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Leadership and Management › Hospital Admissions and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Healthcare Quality and Management
Keywords
patient safety incidents, hospital errors, active failures, team factors, communication, patient harm prevention, secondary care
MeSH terms
Data Interpretation, Statistical, Hospitals, Humans, Quality Assurance, Health Care, Databases, Bibliographic, Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Systems, Medical Errors, Empirical Research, Evidence-Based Practice, Root Cause Analysis, Patient Safety

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