The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Prevalence of adverse events in the hospitals of five Latin American countries: results of the ‘Iberoamerican study of adverse events’ (IBEAS)
Abstract
Background: Interest in patient safety (PS) is growing exponentially, fuelled by epidemiological research unveiling the extent of unsafe care. However, there is little information about the frequency of harm in developing and transitional countries. To address this issue, the authors performed a study known as the Iberoamerican Adverse Event Study, through a collaborative between the governments of Argentina, Colombia, Costa Rica, Mexico and Peru, the Spanish Ministry of Health, Social Policy and Equality, the Pan American Health Organization and the WHO Patient Safety. Methods: The study used a cross-sectional design, involving 58 hospitals in the five Latin American countries, to measure the point prevalence of patients presenting an adverse event (AE) on the day of observation. All inpatients at the time of the study were included. Results: A total of 11 379 inpatients were surveyed. Of these, 1191 had at least one AE that the reviewer judged to be related to the care received rather than to the underlying conditions. The estimated point prevalence rate was 10.5% (95% CI 9.91 to 11.04), with more than 28% of AE causing disability and another 6% associated with the death of the patient. Almost 60% of AE were considered preventable. Conclusions: The high rate of prevalent AE found suggests that PS may represent an important public-health issue in the participating hospitals. While new studies may be needed to confirm these results, these may already be useful to inspire new PS-improvement policies in those settings.
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
Cited by
The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data
Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2529310 · Cited by 81,148
Panagioti, M., Khan, K., Keers, R. N., Abuzour, A., Phipps, D., Kontopantelis, E., Bower, P., Campbell, S., Haneef, R., Avery, A. J., et al. (2019) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.l4185 · Cited by 874
(2017) · OECD Health Working Papers · doi:10.1787/5a9858cd-en · Cited by 616
Schwendimann, R., Blatter, C., Dhaini, S., Simon, M., & Ausserhofer, D. (2018) · BMC Health Services Research · doi:10.1186/s12913-018-3335-z · Cited by 423
Gunderson, C. G., Bilan, V. P., Holleck, J. L., Nickerson, P., Cherry, B. M., Chui, P., Bastian, L. A., Grimshaw, A. A., & Rodwin, B. A. (2020) · BMJ Quality & Safety · doi:10.1136/bmjqs-2019-010822 · Cited by 130
Metadata
- Authors
- Aranaz-Andrés, J. M., Aibar-Remón, C., Limón-Ramírez, R., Amarilla, A., Restrepo, F. R., Urroz, O., Sarabia, O., García-Corcuera, L. V., Terol-García, E., Agra-Varela, Y., Gonseth-García, J., Bates, D. W., & Larizgoitia, I.
- Venue
- BMJ Quality & Safety
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2011-06-28
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 1043-1051
- ISSN
- 1475-3898 (ISSN-L)
- 2044-5415
- 2044-5423
- OpenAlex
- W2105466325
- Cited by
- 235
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 13.33
- 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: Prevalence of adverse events in the hospitals of five Latin American countries: results of the ‘Iberoamerican study of adverse events’ (IBEAS). https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/bmjqs.2011.051284
- The paper
- Aranaz-Andrés, J. M., Aibar-Remón, C., Limón-Ramírez, R., Amarilla, A., Restrepo, F. R., Urroz, O., Sarabia, O., García-Corcuera, L. V., Terol-García, E., Agra-Varela, Y., Gonseth-García, J., Bates, D. W., & Larizgoitia, I. (2011). Prevalence of adverse events in the hospitals of five Latin American countries: results of the ‘Iberoamerican study of adverse events’ (IBEAS). BMJ Quality & Safety. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs.2011.051284
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.