Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 403

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 103 of the 103 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Safety culture in healthcare: a review of concepts, dimensions, measures and progress

Halligan, Michelle, Zecevic, Aleksandra·2011·BMJ Quality & Safety

Abstract

Background: A growing body of peer-reviewed studies demonstrate the importance of safety culture in healthcare safety improvement, but little attention has focused on developing a common set of definitions, dimensions and measures. Objectives: Specific objectives of this literature review include: summarising definitions of safety culture and safety climate, identifying theories, dimensions and measures of safety culture in healthcare, and reviewing progress in improving safety culture. Methods: Peer-reviewed, English-language articles published from 1980 to 2009 pertaining to safety culture in healthcare were reviewed. One hundred and thirty-nine studies were included in this review. Results: Results suggest that there is disagreement among researchers as to how safety culture should be defined, as well as whether or not safety culture is intrinsically diverse from the concept of safety climate. This variance extends into the dimensions and measurement of safety culture, and interventions to influence culture change. Discussion: Most studies utilise quantitative surveys to measure safety culture, and propose improvements in safety by implementing multifaceted interventions targeting several dimensions. Conversely, very few studies made their theoretical underpinnings explicit. Moving forward, a common set of definitions and dimensions will enable researchers to better share information and strategies to improve safety culture in healthcare, building momentum in this rapidly expanding field. Advancing the measurement of safety culture to include both quantitative and qualitative methods should be further explored. Using the expertise of traditional culture experts, anthropologists, more in-depth observational and longitudinal research is needed to move research in this area forward.

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.2010.040964

Cites

103 of 103 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

Cites

Show all 103 references

Cited by

See all 403

Metadata

Authors
Halligan, M., & Zecevic, A.
Venue
BMJ Quality & Safety
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2011-02-08
Volume
20
Issue
4
Pages
338-343
ISSN
  • 1475-3898 (ISSN-L)
  • 2044-5415
  • 2044-5423
OpenAlex
W2148117753
Cited by
403
References
103
FWCI
23.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Safety culture in healthcare: a review of concepts, dimensions, measures and progress. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/bmjqs.2010.040964
The paper
Halligan, M., & Zecevic, A. (2011). Safety culture in healthcare: a review of concepts, dimensions, measures and progress. BMJ Quality & Safety. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs.2010.040964

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.