The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Quantification of the Hawthorne effect in hand hygiene compliance monitoring using an electronic monitoring system: a retrospective cohort study
Open accessAbstract
Background: The Hawthorne effect, or behaviour change due to awareness of being observed, is assumed to inflate hand hygiene compliance rates as measured by direct observation but there are limited data to support this. Objective: To determine whether the presence of hand hygiene auditors was associated with an increase in hand hygiene events as measured by a real-time location system (RTLS). Methods: The RTLS recorded all uses of alcohol-based hand rub and soap for 8 months in two units in an academic acute care hospital. The RTLS also tracked the movement of hospital hand hygiene auditors. Rates of hand hygiene events per dispenser per hour as measured by the RTLS were compared for dispensers within sight of auditors and those not exposed to auditors. Results: The hand hygiene event rate in dispensers visible to auditors (3.75/dispenser/h) was significantly higher than in dispensers not visible to the auditors at the same time (1.48; p=0.001) and in the same dispensers during the week prior (1.07; p<0.001). The rate increased significantly when auditors were present compared with 1–5 min prior to the auditors’ arrival (1.50; p=0.009). There were no significant changes inside patient rooms. Conclusions: Hand hygiene event rates were approximately threefold higher in hallways within eyesight of an auditor compared with when no auditor was visible and the increase occurred after the auditors’ arrival. This is consistent with the existence of a Hawthorne effect localised to areas where the auditor is visible and calls into question the accuracy of publicly reported hospital hand hygiene compliance rates.
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.
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
The Hawthorne effect: A reconsideration of the methodological artifact.
Adair, J. G. (1984) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.69.2.334 · Cited by 1,095
Cited by
Illuminating the dark spaces of healthcare with ambient intelligence
Haque, A., Milstein, A., & Fei-Fei, L. (2020) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-020-2669-y · Cited by 274
Metadata
- Authors
- Srigley, J. A., Furness, C. D., Baker, G. R., & Gardam, M.
- Venue
- BMJ Quality & Safety
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2014-07-07
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 974-980
- ISSN
- 1475-3898 (ISSN-L)
- 2044-5415
- 2044-5423
- OpenAlex
- W2120925410
- Cited by
- 203
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 16.44
- 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: Quantification of the Hawthorne effect in hand hygiene compliance monitoring using an electronic monitoring system: a retrospective cohort study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/bmjqs-2014-003080
- The paper
- Srigley, J. A., Furness, C. D., Baker, G. R., & Gardam, M. (2014). Quantification of the Hawthorne effect in hand hygiene compliance monitoring using an electronic monitoring system: a retrospective cohort study. BMJ Quality & Safety. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2014-003080
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.