Cited by 167Patient Safety and Medication ErrorsElectronic Health Records SystemsHealthcare Technology and Patient Monitoring

An analysis of computer-related patient safety incidents to inform the development of a classification

Open access
Magrabi, Farah, Ong, Mei-Sing, Runciman, William, Coiera, Enrico·2010·Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To analyze patient safety incidents associated with computer use to develop the basis for a classification of problems reported by health professionals. DESIGN: Incidents submitted to a voluntary incident reporting database across one Australian state were retrieved and a subset (25%) was analyzed to identify 'natural categories' for classification. Two coders independently classified the remaining incidents into one or more categories. Free text descriptions were analyzed to identify contributing factors. Where available medical specialty, time of day and consequences were examined. MEASUREMENTS: Descriptive statistics; inter-rater reliability. RESULTS: A search of 42,616 incidents from 2003 to 2005 yielded 123 computer related incidents. After removing duplicate and unrelated incidents, 99 incidents describing 117 problems remained. A classification with 32 types of computer use problems was developed. Problems were grouped into information input (31%), transfer (20%), output (20%) and general technical (24%). Overall, 55% of problems were machine related and 45% were attributed to human-computer interaction. Delays in initiating and completing clinical tasks were a major consequence of machine related problems (70%) whereas rework was a major consequence of human-computer interaction problems (78%). While 38% (n=26) of the incidents were reported to have a noticeable consequence but no harm, 34% (n=23) had no noticeable consequence. CONCLUSION: Only 0.2% of all incidents reported were computer related. Further work is required to expand our classification using incident reports and other sources of information about healthcare IT problems. Evidence based user interface design must focus on the safe entry and retrieval of clinical information and support users in detecting and correcting errors and malfunctions.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/jamia.2009.002444

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

0 of 34 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingown data

    A search of 42,616 incidents reported between 2003 and 2005 yielded 123 computer-related incidents.

    “A search of 42 616 incidents from 2003 to 2005 yielded 123 computer related incidents.”
    • Also stated in: § RESULTS · plain
      “Our search strategy retrieved 123 incidents, 23 of which were retrieved using AIMS and the remainder from free-text searches of incident descriptions (see online supplementary appendix B, available at www.jamia.org).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The keyword-based free-text search strategy comprehensively identifies computer-related patient safety incidents in the AIMS database.
  • Findingown data

    A classification with 32 types of computer use problems was developed.

    “A classification with 32 types of computer use problems was developed.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The 25% subset of incidents used to develop natural categories is representative of the full set of computer-related incidents.
  • Findingown data

    After removing duplicates and unrelated incidents, 99 incidents describing 117 problems remained.

    “After removing duplicate and unrelated incidents, 99 incidents describing 117 problems remained.”
    • Also stated in: § Classification of computer-related problems · plain
      “Examination of the remaining 99 incidents revealed 117 problems.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The keyword-based free-text search strategy comprehensively identifies computer-related patient safety incidents in the AIMS database.
  • Findingown data

    Rework was a major consequence of human-computer interaction problems (78%).

    “rework was a major consequence of humancomputer interaction problems (78%)”
    • Also stated in: § Classification of computer-related problems · plain
      “In contrast, rework was a major consequence of problems in humanecomputer interaction (78%, n¼18).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The 25% subset of incidents used to develop natural categories is representative of the full set of computer-related incidents.
  • Findingown data

    Delays in initiating and completing clinical tasks were a major consequence of machine-related problems (70%).

    “Delays in initiating and completing clinical tasks were a major consequence of machine related problems (70%)”
    • Also stated in: § Classification of computer-related problems · plain
      “Delays in initiating and completing clinical tasks directly related to patient care were a major consequence of machine-related problems (70%, n¼39).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The 25% subset of incidents used to develop natural categories is representative of the full set of computer-related incidents.
  • May combine two claims. 29
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 15
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Overall, 55% of problems were machine related and 45% were attributed to human-computer interaction.

    “Overall, 55% of problems were machine related and 45% were attributed to human-computer interaction.”
    • Also stated in: § Classification of computer-related problems · plain
      “Of these, 55% (n¼64) were machine-related problems and 45% (n¼53) were problems in humanecomputer interaction (table 2).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The 25% subset of incidents used to develop natural categories is representative of the full set of computer-related incidents.
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Of the incidents, 38% (n=26) had a noticeable consequence but no harm, while 34% (n=23) had no noticeable consequence.

    “While 38% (n¼26) of the incidents were reported to have a noticeable consequence but no harm, 34% (n¼23) had no noticeable consequence.”
    • Also stated in: § RESULTS · plain
      “While 38% (n¼26) of the incidents were reported to have a noticeable consequence but no harm, 34% (n¼23) had no noticeable consequence.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The 25% subset of incidents used to develop natural categories is representative of the full set of computer-related incidents.
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Information output problems accounted for 20% of incidents (n=23) caused by malfunctioning peripheral devices (n=13, 11%).

    “Information output problems accounted for 20% of incidents (n¼23) caused by malfunctioning peripheral devices (n¼13, 11%; eg, printers and monitors).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The 25% subset of incidents used to develop natural categories is representative of the full set of computer-related incidents.
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Some incidents (6.0%, n=7) related to problems in updating data and missing data (6.0%, n=7).

    “Some incidents (6.0%, n¼7) related to problems in updating data (eg, 'computer system not updated when patient transferred between wards', 'medication lists not updated on admission') and missing data (6.0%,n¼7) (eg, 'details of primary care physician not entered in online system').”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The 25% subset of incidents used to develop natural categories is representative of the full set of computer-related incidents.
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Software-related errors were detected by vigilant staff and required rework to correct mistakes.

    “Softwarerelated errors were detected by vigilant staff and required rework to correct mistakes (eg, 'letters needed to be re-done').”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The 25% subset of incidents used to develop natural categories is representative of the full set of computer-related incidents.
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    In eight incidents, IT improved patient safety by helping detect drug-drug interactions, duplicate medication orders, MRSA infection risk, checking and correcting dialysis treatment, finding discrepancies in antenatal paper records, and providing up-to-date contact details.

    “Examination of these incidents (n¼8) revealed that the availability and sharing of electronic health records (EHR) aided detection of drugedrug interactions (eg, warfarine tramadol), duplicate medication orders and MRSA infection risk, assisted checking and correction of dialysis treatment, found discrepancies in antenatal paper records, and provided up-to-date contact details.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The authors expanded these categories to identify specific manifestations and added two general categories to account for technical problems and contributing factors described by reporters.

    “We have expanded these categories to identify specific manifestations of these problems and added two general categories to account for technical problems and contributing factors described by reporters.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Poor performance or failure of a single workstation prevented staff from carrying out tasks, caused delays, and was reported to be a source of significant frustration.

    “As with network problems, poor performance or failure of a single workstation prevented staff from carrying out tasks (eg, 'nurses unable to access results and complete handovers', 'clinician unable to access care plan for frequently presenting patient who required treatment within 30 min in Emergency'), caused delays and were reported to be a source of significant frustration.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The 25% subset of incidents used to develop natural categories is representative of the full set of computer-related incidents.
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Notification problems delayed treatment and were reported to be a source of frustration for staff who needed to act upon test results.

    “Notification problems delayed treatment and were reported to be a source of frustration for staff who needed to act upon test results.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The 25% subset of incidents used to develop natural categories is representative of the full set of computer-related incidents.
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Potential and actual breaches of patient privacy were reported to be the consequence of printouts left at patients' bedsides as well as failure to log-off the computer system.

    “Potential and actual breaches of patient privacy were reported to be the consequence of printouts left at patients' bedsides as well as failure to log-off the computer system.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The 25% subset of incidents used to develop natural categories is representative of the full set of computer-related incidents.
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    Lack of access to the computer system often resulted in workarounds relying on paper-based records, which were often inefficient and ineffective.

    “Lack of access to the computer system (eg, EHR) often resulted in workarounds relying on paper-based records, which were often inefficient and ineffective.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Technical issues relating to computer hardware, software, or networking infrastructure accounted for over half the problems reported (55%), with human factors reported to be the primary cause in the remaining 45%.

    “We found that technical issues relating to computer hardware, software, or networking infrastructure accounted for over half the problems reported (55%), with human factors reported to be the primary cause in the remaining 45%.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Of the 111 incidents, eight described an improvement in patient safety due to IT, and four were unresolvable.

    “Of the 111 incidents, eight described an improvement in patient safety due to IT, and four were unresolvable.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The 25% subset of incidents used to develop natural categories is representative of the full set of computer-related incidents.
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Reported contributing factors included lack of training, failure to carry out a duty, high cognitive workload, and the effects of multitasking.

    “Factors reported including the lack of training, failure to carry out a duty, high cognitive workload, and the effects of multitasking.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Delays in initiating or completing clinical tasks were a major consequence of the computer-related incidents examined, and were associated with 70% of machine-related problems.

    “Delays in initiating or completing clinical tasks were reported to be a major consequence of the computer-related incidents we examined, and were associated with 70% of machine-related problems.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Six out of 10 problems in human-computer interaction related to data entry (64%), and retrieval of clinical and patient data was also problematic.

    “Six out of 10 problems in humane computer interaction related to data entry (64%), and retrieval of clinical and patient data was also problematic.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Machine-related problems (software- and hardware-related) accounted for more than half of the problems, with most of the remainder attributed to problems with human-computer interactions.

    “Machine-related problems (software-and hardware-related) accounted for more than half of the problems, with most of the remainder attributed to problems with humanecomputer interactions.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    Fewer mismatches between actual clinical workflow and the system model were reported compared to Koppel et al's mixed method study, most likely representing a narrower focus on the part of clinicians forwarding incidents.

    “Fewer mismatches between actual clinical workflow and the system model were reported in comparison to Koppel et al's mixed method study, most likely representing a narrower focus on the part of clinicians forwarding incidents.8”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [8] source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Patient safety risks and incidents caused by problems with computer use are widely recognized as an unintended consequence of healthcare information technology.

    “Patient safety risks and incidents caused by problems with the use of computers are now widely recognized as an unintended consequence of healthcare information technology (IT), 1e3 just as 'revenge effects' have been described after other system changes.4”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites 1e3

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [4] source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    In February 2010, the US FDA reported receiving information on 260 incidents with potential for patient harm, including 44 injuries and six deaths.

    “In February 2010, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reported receiving information on 260 incidents with potential for patient harm including 44 injuries and six deaths.6”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [6] US Office of the National Coordinator for Health IT, HIT Policy Committee, Adoption/Certification Workgroup meeting 2010. http://healthit.hhs.gov/.

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    With large collections of incidents, characteristic profiles may be identified, allowing incidents to be aggregated and analyzed.

    “However, with large collections of incidents, characteristic profiles may be identified, allowing incidents to be aggregated and analyzed.23”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [23] Symposium. The Australian Incident Monitoring System. Anaesth Intensive Care 1993;21:501–695. source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Incident reports do not yield true frequencies of errors or adverse events because they do not capture numerators or denominators, and are subject to bias from a number of sources.

    “It is important to note that incident reports do not yield true frequencies of errors or adverse events because they do not capture numerators or denominators, and are subject to bias from a number of sources.22”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [22] source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The ICPS framework is based upon existing classifications such as AIMS, with additional input from international experts in safety, systems engineering, health policy, medicine, and the law.

    “The framework is based upon existing classifications such as AIMS, with additional input from international experts in safety, systems engineering, health policy, medicine, and the law.5 28 29”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [5] source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [28] source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [29] source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Two of the main categories map to the high-level error classes first identified by Ash et al.: 'Information input problems' and 'information output problems' correspond to errors in 'entering and retrieving information', and 'information transfer problems' correspond to 'communication and co-ordination'.

    “Two of our main categories map to the high-level error classes first identified by Ash et al. 1 'Information input problems' and 'information output problems' correspond to errors in 'entering and retrieving information', and 'information transfer problems' correspond to 'communication and co-ordination'.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [1] source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Identifying the natural categories of safety incidents has been the method used for creating the AIMS classification, which is the starting point for expanding the ICPS.

    “Identifying the natural categories of safety incidents has been the method used for creating the AIMS classification, which is the starting point for expanding the ICPS.18 30”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [18] source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [30] source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    When coders disagreed on a primary classification, the event was re-examined and a consensus category assigned.

    “When coders disagreed on a primary classification, the event was re-examined and a consensus category assigned.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    Such a classification will allow information about computer-related incidents to be collated and classified, providing an objective basis for comparing patterns over time and between settings, and for the development and prioritization of preventive and corrective strategies.

    “Such a classification will allow information about computer-related incidents to be collated and classified, providing an objective basis for comparing patterns over time and between settings, and for the development and prioritization of preventive and corrective strategies.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Incident reporting to facilitate rapid communication of safety flaws and critical events arising from computer use is one of seven steps proposed to improve the safety of healthcare IT.

    “Indeed, incident reporting to facilitate rapid communication of safety flaws and critical events arising from computer use is one of seven steps which have been proposed to improve the safety of healthcare IT. 20”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [20] source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    The classification was developed without reference to AIMS to avoid constraining the range of new categories.

    “This was done without reference to AIMS to avoid constraining the range of new categories.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Sittig and Classen endorse the reporting of computer-related incidents as an essential component of their framework for safe use of IT systems.

    “Sittig and Classen 21 endorse the reporting of computer-related incidents as an essential component of their framework for safe use of IT systems.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [21] source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Computers are listed as an option under the 'medical equipment/device' category within an equipment list sourced from the ECRI's Universal Medical Device Nomenclature System (UMDNS).

    “Computers are listed as an option under the 'medical equipment/device' category within an equipment list that is sourced from the ECRI's Universal Medical Device Nomenclature System (UMDNS).26”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [26] Emergency Care Research Institute (ECRI) [Internet] 2010. http://www.ecri.org (accessed Nov 2008).

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    The AIMS system does not specifically elicit information about IT incidents, which may have inhibited reporting.

    “the system used (AIMS) does not specifically elicit information about IT incidents, which may have inhibited reporting (most incidents in our analysis were retrieved from free-text descriptions)”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    The classification developed for AIMS allows incidents to be grouped according to 13 healthcare incident types (HIT).

    “The classification developed for AIMS allows incidents to be grouped according to 13 healthcare incident types (HIT), such as 'clinical process/procedure' or 'medication/ IV fluid.' 23e25”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites 23e25

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The Advanced Incident Management System (AIMS) is an incident reporting system based on 20 years of patient safety research, in use since 1998 in more than 1000 facilities across Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, and the United States.

    “The Advanced Incident Management System (AIMS) 18 is one such incident reporting system, based on 20 years of research in patient safety, and has been in use since 1998 in more than 1000 facilities in Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, and the United States.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [18] source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    A framework for an International Classification for Patient Safety (ICPS) has been agreed to by a drafting group convened by the WHO World Alliance for Patient Safety.

    “Recently, a framework for an International Classification for Patient Safety (ICPS) has been agreed to, by a drafting group convened by the World Health Organization (WHO) World Alliance for Patient Safety.27”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [27] International Classification for Patient Safety [Internet] 2010. http://www.who.int/patientsafety/en/ (accessed Feb 2010).

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    The dataset used, from one Australian state, has limitations imposed by the education provided and practices which evolved in that state with respect to incident reporting.

    “Another limitation is that the dataset used, from one Australian state, has limitations imposed by the education provided and practices which evolved in that state with respect to incident reporting.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductcitation

    The incidents studied are based on self-reports provided to a voluntary incident reporting system, with inherent limitations such as a bias toward reporting incidents which appear interesting or unusual.

    “The incidents studied here are based on self-reports provided to a voluntary incident reporting system, with all the inherent limitations of such a system, such as a bias toward reporting incidents which appear interesting or unusual.22”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [22] source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Incident reports are useful in providing a profile of the nature of the problems encountered, and this profile has generally been shown to be consistent until interventions are introduced.

    “As we have shown in other domains, such incident reports are useful in providing a profile of the nature of the problems encountered, and this profile has generally been shown to be consistent until interventions are introduced to address problems identified.22”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [22] source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    The computer-related problems identified are limited to the types of IT systems in use at the time and represent only a small proportion of the kinds of problems that might be encountered.

    “The computer-related problems we have identified are limited to the types of IT systems in use at the time and represent only a small proportion of the kinds of problems that might be encountered.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given

    The incidents analyzed were reported over a significant period, providing sufficient data for some quantitative and qualitative analyses.

    “However, the incidents analyzed were reported over a significant period, providing sufficient data for some quantitative and qualitative analyses.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
40 of 40
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The keyword-based free-text search strategy comprehensively identifies computer-related patient safety incidents in the AIMS database.

    “Free-text searches of incident description fields were conducted using a set of keywords generated by the investigators to describe computer hardware, software, or displays based upon knowledge of the clinical information systems deployed in the jurisdiction (box 1).”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The 25% subset of incidents used to develop natural categories is representative of the full set of computer-related incidents.

    “We examined the free-text descriptions of a quarter of the incidents retrieved (25% of 123) to identify 'natural categories' for classification.30”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    This is the first study to examine computer-related patient safety incidents reported by health professionals to a state-wide system to develop categories for a classification.

    “This is the first study we are aware of which examines computer-related patient safety incidents reported by health professionals to a state-wide system in order to develop categories to provide the basis for a classification.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Patient safety incidents associated with computer use have not been extensively investigated.

    “Patient safety incidents associated with computer use have not been extensively investigated.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The types of error are finite in number and, when systematically identified and addressed, can lead to improvements in patient safety.

    “the types of error are finite in number and, when systematically identified and addressed, can lead to improvements in patient safety.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Incident reports are useful for learning even when no actual harm resulted, when clinicians feel that there has been a near miss or that a catastrophic outcome could have resulted.

    “Incident reports are useful for learning even when no actual harm resulted, when clinicians feel that there has been a near miss or that a catastrophic outcome could have resulted.”
6 of 6

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?

  • A few studies have attempted to quantify and classify EHR-related safety concerns by mining patient safety incident reporting databases.

    “A few studies have attempted to quantify and classify EHR-related safety concerns by mining patient safety incident reporting databases.18 29–31”
  • Previous studies have largely used isolated event reports without benefit of an independent human factors and informatics investigation to analyze safety concerns in the EHR.

    “Previous studies have largely used isolated event reports without benefit of an independent human factors and informatics investigation to analyze safety concerns in the EHR.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Koppel citation points to an Ash reference

    Minor

    The text cites reference 8 for work by Koppel and colleagues, but reference 8 lists Ash and colleagues; the Koppel entry is numbered 7.

  • Software-unavailable row overstates its percentage

    Minor

    Table 3 gives one software-unavailable problem among 117 problems. That is about 0.85%, which rounds to 1%, not 2%.

    Reported 2 · recomputed 0.854701

2 of 2

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Australian Medication Safety Working Group. Towards the safer use of drugs and blood products in Australia. J Qual Clin Pract 1999;19:1–72.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Magrabi, F., Ong, M.-S., Runciman, W., & Coiera, E.
Affiliations
  • UNSW Sydney (AU)
  • University of South Australia (AU)
Corresponding author
Magrabi, Farah
Venue
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
Published
2010-11
Volume
17
Issue
6
Pages
663-670
ISSN
  • 1067-5027 (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-974X
OpenAlex
W2127433315
Cited by
162
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 24 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 17 · 2012: 12
FWCI
16.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Adelaide Research & Scholarship (AR&S) (University of Adelaide) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • University of New South Wales
  • Australian Research Council (DP0772487, LP0775532)
  • National Health and Medical Research Council (568612)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Emergency Medical Services › Patient Safety and Medication Errors
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Healthcare Technology and Patient Monitoring
Keywords
incident classification, human-computer interaction, health information technology, medical information retrieval, user interface design, incident reporting, medical errors, rework, inter-rater reliability
MeSH terms
Australia, Computer Systems, Humans, Medical Informatics, Risk Management, User-Computer Interface, Information Storage and Retrieval, Medical Errors, Equipment Failure Analysis

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.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-07.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-07.

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