The DOI matches its Crossref record; 49 of the 53 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 35 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Work system design for patient safety: the SEIPS model
Open accessAbstract
Models and methods of work system design need to be developed and implemented to advance research in and design for patient safety. In this paper we describe how the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) model of work system and patient safety, which provides a framework for understanding the structures, processes and outcomes in health care and their relationships, can be used toward these ends. An application of the SEIPS model in one particular care setting (outpatient surgery) is presented and other practical and research applications of the model are described.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
63 Own interpretation · 26 Sources not found · 9 No full text of the sources · 9 Own result · 4 No basis given
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Tasks, tools, and organization coincide with an issue repeatedly reported by staff concerning the process of obtaining clinical information on patients in a timely fashion.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Likewise, quality and safety issues identified were related to insufficient and potentially inaccurate information then collected because of the last minute nature of these clinical assessments.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Staff responses to the questionnaire were also associated with various processes (including care processes) and outcomes.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Staff responses to the questionnaire can be associated with numerous aspects of the work system.29”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [29] 29. Carayon P, Gurses AP, Hundt AS, et al. Performance obstacles and facilitators of healthcare providers. In: Korunka C, Hoffmann P, eds. Change and quality in human service work. Munich: Hampp Publishers, 2005:257-76.
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
In the paper
“and nesting itself in a model familiar to many health care professionals-namely, Donabedian's quality model.11 12”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites 11 12
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As a result, components of the work system (such as the organization or the environment) and their interdependencies may be overlooked or underemphasized.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The interactions between the various components ''produce'' different outcomes: performance, safety and health, and quality of working life.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [5][6][7]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Donabedian's model explicitly links the structure and processes of care to subsequent patient outcomes.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [19] 19. Donabedian A. The quality of care. How can it be assessed? JAMA 1988;260:1743-8.
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Assessing patient safety and designing systems that produce safe patient care can be accomplished by using the SEIPS model that integrates Donabedian's structure-processoutcome (SPO) framework and the work system model (fig 1).”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The SEIPS model builds on this idea by showing how work system design (structure) is linked to patient safety (outcome) through care processes.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Probably not a substantial claim. 66
- It may state two separate claims as one. 20
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“They also emphasized coordination issues related to patient information.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Likewise, it was easier to understand comments on the staff questionnaire concerning the work space.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“They commented about the low quality of communication with patients regarding preoperative preparation (for example, understanding of instructions) and postoperative recovery (for example, inconsistencies in providers' instructions).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For instance, unavailability of patient related information sometimes can lead to cancellations of surgeries on the day they are scheduled.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A review of the floor plans helped the research team further understand the reasons for these concerns.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Staff offered suggestions to remedy this problem through redesign of forms and changes in policy and job design.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Here staff conveyed the inherent inefficiencies of tracking down information that should have been previously provided.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For instance, concern was expressed by staff regarding the lack of privacy for patients and high noise levels.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This gave us greater insight concerning the expectations for the various positions as well as how each centre was organized according to the various tasks.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In this case the plans provided an understanding of the work flow and offered a greater appreciation for the confidentiality issues identified during the patient shadowing.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We suggest that the work system model applied to patient safety complements and expands Donabedian's framework.”
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Changes to any aspect of the work system will, depending on how the change or improvement is designed and implemented, either negatively or positively affect the work and clinical processes and the consequent patient, employee, and organizational outcomes.”
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The discipline of human factors emphasizes interactions between people and their environment that contribute to performance, safety and health, and quality of working life, and the goods or services produced.13 14”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites 13 14
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“In Donabedian's model, the structure includes the organizational structure (work system model component = organization); the material resources (work system model components = environment, technology/tools); and the human resources (work system model components = care provider, tasks).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [19] 19. Donabedian A. The quality of care. How can it be assessed? JAMA 1988;260:1743-8.
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Overall, the work system in which care is provided affects both the work and clinical processes, which in turn influence the patient, employee, and organizational outcomes of care.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“our SEIPS model does not highlight any single element of the work system.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“According to the work system model, a person (the person could be a care provider, another employee of a healthcare institution such as a biomedical engineer, a unit clerk, or the patient) performs a range of tasks using various tools and technologies.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [5][6][7]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Donabedian 20 concludes that direct relationships may exist between structure, process and outcome.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [20] 20. Donabedian A. The definition of quality and approaches to its assessment. Ann Arbor, MI: Health Administration Press, 1980.
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This reflects the fact that most of the focus of the SPO model centres on the providers and their relationship with the processes and outcome(s)-that is, quality is assessed by the way in which care is provided by an individual or care team as well as the outcome of the care.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Donabedian's two other means of assessing quality include evaluating the process(es) of care (how provider tasks and clinical processes are both organized and performed) and evaluating the outcome(s) of care (assessing the clinical results and impacts of and patient satisfaction with the care provided).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [19] 19. Donabedian A. The quality of care. How can it be assessed? JAMA 1988;260:1743-8.
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The implication is, therefore, that aspects of the structure may be of lesser consequence.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“According to Donabedian's model, poor quality, in turn, results by not following what is defined as the appropriate or correct means of performing a task (poor process).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [19] 19. Donabedian A. The quality of care. How can it be assessed? JAMA 1988;260:1743-8.
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“In Donabedian's model, however, there is a clear statement that ''we must begin … with the performance of physicians and other health care providers''.19”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [19] 19. Donabedian A. The quality of care. How can it be assessed? JAMA 1988;260:1743-8.
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“The performance of these tasks occurs within a certain physical environment and under specific organizational conditions.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [5][6][7]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is important to recognize that a healthcare work system often includes both healthcare providers and the patient being cared for.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The fact that the SEIPS model explains how the design of a system can impact patients, employees, and the organization has its roots in the theory of healthy work organizations (HWOs).”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The work system model also allows linkage of the various elements of the structure in the SPO model-that is, the organizational structure and material and human resources.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It proposes the work system model as an expansion of the structure by addressing elements of the work system model such as the physical environment, organizational culture and climate, error reporting and analysis, and work design that are so much a part of the current patient safety focus.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The SEIPS model specifies feedback loops from processes to work system and from outcomes to work system.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Any healthcare work system can therefore involve multiple individuals such as healthcare providers and patients.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“However, it has been noted that physician professionalism also fosters a ''culture of blame'' when things go wrong because, if physicians are responsible for the entire medical process, then they are also exclusively to blame for poor quality care.26”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [26] 26. Leape LL. Error in medicine. JAMA 1994;272:1851-7.
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Professionals such as physicians, nurses, pharmacists, and other licensed healthcare providers are bound by ethical mandates to serve in their clients' best interests.25”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [25] 25. ABIM Foundation. ACP-ASIM Foundation, European Federation of Internal Medicine. Medical professionalism in the new millennium: a physician charter. Ann Intern Med 2002;136:243-6. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For instance, a care process can be considered as a series of steps or tasks performed by an individual or a team of individuals using various technologies and tools; the care process may involve various locations, therefore different physical environments.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“A system redesign approach to changing physician behavior may not only be a more effective approach, but may be better accepted by physicians than traditional organizational efforts to improve quality using incentives.27”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [27] 27. Flynn EA, Barker KN, Pepper GA, et al. Comparison of methods for detecting medication errors in 36 hospitals and skilled-nursing facilities. Am J Health- System Pharm 2002;59:436-46. source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Poor processes and outcomes can be triggers for system redesign: the need would then arise to identify negative work system elements that affect processes and the quality and safety of care, as well as employee and organizational outcomes.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The patient is also involved in patient care processes and is the ''recipient'' of good or bad outcomes of the care process.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“HWOs are organizations that have both good organizational outcomes and a healthy and safe workforce.31 32”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites 31 32
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“From this viewpoint, the patient is an ''input'' into the SEIPS model.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Some negative elements in a work system that are hard to change may be overcome by focusing on some other positive elements.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Conversely, patient safety activities place greater emphasis on the system in which practitioners work and less on individual performance.21”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [21] 21. Leape LL, Bates DW, Cullen DJ, et al. Systems analysis of adverse drug events. JAMA 1995;274:35-43. source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, the PICC line intervention may not decrease the nurse's workload but add to the workload as more and more patients require PICC line insertion rather than central venous catheter insertions.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our model emphasizes the linkages between patient outcomes and employee/organizational outcomes.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the SEIPS model the individual is at the centre of the work system.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These system redesigns support rather than conflict with the physician's role as a professional.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The implication is that outcomes (both patient and employee/organizational, as proposed by the SEIPS model) are related and that they also are associated with structure aspects of the SPO model.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These feedback loops represent pathways to design or redesign the work system.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The care process is also affected by multiple organizational characteristics such as the need for coordination and collaboration among the healthcare providers involved in the process.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Donabedian's model focuses on care process(es)-that is, how care is provided, delivered and managed.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [19] 19. Donabedian A. The quality of care. How can it be assessed? JAMA 1988;260:1743-8.
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Likewise, a bad outcome is associated with the poor performance of an individual (or a group of individuals).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [19] 19. Donabedian A. The quality of care. How can it be assessed? JAMA 1988;260:1743-8.
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For instance, a care process can be considered as a series of steps or tasks performed by an individual or a team of individuals using various technologies and tools; the care process may involve various locations, therefore different physical environments.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Firstly, if the individual in the work system is a healthcare provider, tasks performed by the individual often involve the patient-for example, surgical tasks.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Using the SEIPS model with the patient at the centre of the work system model can help to identify deficiencies in the healthcare system that can impair the patient's capacity to receive high quality safe care, and therefore contribute to the design of systems and processes for delivering patient centred care.”
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“Involvement of physicians in the system redesign process is critical to both the success of the system and to physician acceptance of the new system.26”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [26] 26. Leape LL. Error in medicine. JAMA 1994;272:1851-7.
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The SEIPS model expands the concept of process to include not only care processes but also other processes that support the care process such as maintenance, housekeeping and supply chain management.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“6thers have also emphasized the important relationship between patient outcomes and employee/organizational outcomes.15 33”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites 15 33
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It can be used proactively to guide system design and hazard analysis, or reactively to guide patient or employee injury investigations.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The design of work systems affects patient safety as well as employee and organizational outcomes.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is descriptive, not prescriptive.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This can be considered as a limitation of the model because it does not provide specific guidance as to the critical elements; but it can also be a strength because the model is generic and adaptable to the particular context or situation.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The individual is at the centre of the work system and can be a healthcare provider, a healthcare team, or the patient.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, it provides a framework on how to think about the different aspects of a work system, their interactions, and possible outcomes.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“The professional model assumes that providers have the ultimate authority to define and carry out the core tasks of providing medical care.42”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [42] 42. Freidson E. Profession of medicine: a study of the sociology of applied knowledge. New York: Harper & Row, 1970.
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Recognizing potential resistance and obtaining strong support from key opinion leaders 43 is essential to effective implementation of the SEIPS model.”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [43] 43. Flynn KE, Smith MA, Davis MK. From physician to consumer: the effectiveness of strategies to manage health care utilization. Med Care Res Rev 2002;59:455-81. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It can also guide patient safety researchers toward developing research questions and understanding what variables to measure for a particular study.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Because the professional status of providers is linked so strongly to their autonomy, they may resist system efforts to manage the process of medical care as infringing on their autonomy and degrading their professional status.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This can be considered as a limitation of the model because it does not provide specific guidance as to the critical elements; but it can also be a strength because the model is generic and adaptable to the particular context or situation.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We have shown that the SEIPS model can be applied in many different ways to patient safety challenges.”
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is critical to understand how resistance to a systems approach may limit effective implementation of the SEIPS model in practice.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The design of work systems influences processes which, in turn, affect outcomes.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The SEIPS model is useful for providing a view of the whole system instead of focusing on only one aspect of the work system and treating that aspect in isolation.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“They also influence each other.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
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?
In the citing paper
“Detecting and preventing EHR-related safety concerns is challenging because concerns are often multifaceted, involving not only potentially unsafe technological features of the EHR but also EHR user behaviors, organizational characteristics, and rules and regulations that guide EHR-related activities.”
From An analysis of electronic health record-related patient safety concerns (2014) · cites this paper as [27]
In the citing paper
“In addition, conceptual frameworks or models have been developed to incorporate the breadth of technical and non-technical factors into the analysis of EHR safety and effectiveness.21 25 27 32 33”
From An analysis of electronic health record-related patient safety concerns (2014) · cites this paper as [27]
In the citing paper
“Another systematic review of the effect of EHR use on the quality of outpatient care came to a similarly negative conclusion.29”
From EHR Safety: The Way Forward to Safe and Effective Systems (2008) · cites this paper as [29]
Citations
Cites
Institute of Medicine (2000) · National Academies Press eBooks · doi:10.17226/9728 · Cited by 14,390
Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century
Baker, A. (2001) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.323.7322.1192 · Cited by 10,779
To Err is Human: Building a Safer Health System
Hendee, W. R. (2001) · Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology · doi:10.1016/s1051-0443(01)70072-3 · Cited by 10,129
Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century
Committee on Quality of Health Care in America (2002) · Journal for Healthcare Quality · doi:10.1111/j.1945-1474.2002.tb00463.x · Cited by 8,508
Evaluating the quality of medical care
DONABEDIAN, A. (2005) · The Milbank Quarterly · doi:10.1111/j.1468-0009.2005.00397.x · Cited by 6,102
Donabedian, A. (1988) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.260.12.1743 · Cited by 5,895
Evaluating the Quality of Medical Care
Donabedian, A. (1966) · The Milbank Memorial Fund Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3348969 · Cited by 4,418
Profession of Medicine: A Study of the Sociology of Applied Knowledge.
Clausen, G. T., & Freidson, E. (1971) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2093843 · Cited by 2,047
Leape, L. L. (1994) · PubMed · Cited by 1,961
The definition of quality and approaches to its assessment
Donabedian, A. (1980) · Health Administration Press eBooks · Cited by 1,749
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- [8]8. Reason J. Human error. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990.
- [31]31. Sauter S, Lim SY, Murphy LR. Organizational health: a new paradigm for occupational stress at NIOSH (in Japanese). Japanese J Occup Mental Health 1996;4:248-54.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 601–700 of 1,789
Lee, T. W., Kim, P. J., Lee, H. Y., Shin, H. K., Lee, H. S., & Choi, Y. (2021) · Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing Administration · doi:10.11111/jkana.2021.27.1.34 · Cited by 13
Measuring Work Demands in Hospital Nursing: A Feasibility Study
Knudsen, É. N. A., Brzozowski, S. L., & Steege, L. M. B. (2018) · IISE Transactions on Occupational Ergonomics and Human Factors · doi:10.1080/24725838.2018.1509910 · Cited by 14
“Data sources for this study were identified using the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) model (Carayon et al., 2006) and literature on job demands (Bakker, Demerouti, De Boer, & Schaufeli, 2003; Chen, Daraiseh, Davis, & Pan, 2014; Duffield et al., 2011) to depict multiple…”
MethodThe 2015 Garrod Lecture: Why is improvement difficult?
Davey, P. G. (2015) · Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy · doi:10.1093/jac/dkv214 · Cited by 13
Factors Influencing Successful Prescribing by Intern Doctors: A Qualitative Systematic Review
Hansen, C. R., Bradley, C., & Sahm, L. J. (2016) · Pharmacy · doi:10.3390/pharmacy4030024 · Cited by 13
Boet, S., Burns, J. K., Brehaut, J., et al. (2023) · Journal of Interprofessional Care · doi:10.1080/13561820.2023.2171373 · Cited by 13
“…Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) model considers the interactions of six components related to patient safety: person, tasks, tools and technology, physical environment, organization, and external environment (Carayon et al., 2006; Carayona et al., 2014; Holden et al., 2013).”
BackgroundSkoogh, A., Bååth, C., Sandin‐Bojö, A., & Hall‐Lord, M. (2019) · Nursing Open · doi:10.1002/nop2.435 · Cited by 13
“Email: annika.skoogh@kau.se K E Y W O R D S healthcare worker, interviews, intrapartum, phenomenography, quality and safety (Carayon et al., 2006).”
BackgroundPhysical Environment Design for Improving Patient Safety
Gürses, A. P., & Pronovost, P. J. (2011) · HERD Health Environments Research & Design Journal · doi:10.1177/193758671100500101 · Cited by 12
“In any health-related work system, there are five components that affect care: people (care providers, patients), tasks, technologies/tools, organization, and the physical environment (Carayon et al., 2006).”
BackgroundSelf-citationChronic lithium toxicity: Considerations and systems analysis.
MacLeod-Glover, N., & Chuang, R. (2020) · PubMed · Cited by 13
Flow Disruptions in Trauma Surgery: Type, Impact, and Affect
Blocker, R. C., Duff, S. N., Wiegmann, D. A., et al. (2012) · Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting · doi:10.1177/1071181312561169 · Cited by 13
Barriers and facilitators to Clostridium difficile infection prevention: A nursing perspective
Ngam, C. R., Hundt, A. S., Haun, N., et al. (2017) · American Journal of Infection Control · doi:10.1016/j.ajic.2017.07.009 · Cited by 13
Self-citationLachman, P. I. (2013) · BMJ Quality & Safety · doi:10.1136/bmjqs-2013-002322 · Cited by 16
“13 Yet despite the increasing understanding of the theory of patient safety and what is needed, we remain unable to materially improve, unless the key factors identified by Leape et al 3 are addressed.”
BackgroundHuman Factors: Bridging Artificial Intelligence and Patient Safety
Choudhury, A., & Asan, O. (2020) · Proceedings of the International Symposium on Human Factors and Ergonomics in Health Care · doi:10.1177/2327857920091007 · Cited by 20
“Most errors and safety concerns rooted in conflicting and incomplete subsystems, so not necessarily from the actions of individuals (Carayon et al., 2006).”
BackgroundAlyousef, B., Carayon, P., Hoonakker, P., Hundt, A. S., Salek, D., & Tomcavage, J. F. (2016) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2016.1270017 · Cited by 13
“Scales were also constructed for two of the dependent variables, workload, and burnout (see Table 4), by summing up items and transforming the sums into 0 – 100 scores (Carayon et al., 2006b; Hoonakker et al., 2011).”
BackgroundMethodSelf-citationErgonomics and Human Factors in Healthcare System Design – An Introduction to This Special Issue
Neumann, P., Steege, L. M. B., Jun, G. T., et al. (2018) · IISE Transactions on Occupational Ergonomics and Human Factors · doi:10.1080/24725838.2018.1560927 · Cited by 13
“The Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) model, originally proposed by Pascale Carayon et al. (2006) and extended (Holden et al., 2013), is probably the most widely spread model of the sociotechnical nature of healthcare systems.”
MethodHignett, S. M., Griffiths, P. L., Sands, G., Wolf, L., & Costantinou, E. (2013) · Proceedings of the International Symposium on Human Factors and Ergonomics in Health Care · doi:10.1177/2327857913021019 · Cited by 13
“The Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) has been widely used as an intervention framework in healthcare (Carayon et al, 2006).”
MethodTrust and Human Factors in the Design of Healthcare Technology
Borsci, S., Buckle, P., Walne, S., & Salanitri, D. (2018) · Advances in intelligent systems and computing · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-96071-5_21 · Cited by 13
Barker, A., Krasity, B. C., Musuuza, J., & Safdar, N. (2018) · Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology · doi:10.1017/ice.2017.286 · Cited by 13
“Participant statements with supporting quotations were organized into key themes corresponding to the subcategories of the SEIPS conceptual framework.(10)”
MethodInfluentialCarayon, P. (2012) · Work · doi:10.3233/wor-2012-0096-5037 · Cited by 13
Self-citationBethel, C., Reed, P. G., Brewer, B. B., & Rainbow, J. G. (2021) · Applied Nursing Research · doi:10.1016/j.apnr.2021.151513 · Cited by 15
Physical distancing for care delivery in health care settings: Considerations and consequences
Parmasad, V., Keating, J. A., Carayon, P., et al. (2020) · American Journal of Infection Control · doi:10.1016/j.ajic.2020.12.014 · Cited by 12
Self-citationParental Insights into Improving Home Pulse Oximetry Monitoring in Infants
Ferro, D. F., Bonafide, C. P., Fregene, N., Ruppel, H., Nelson, M. N., Eriksen, W., & DeMauro, S. B. (2022) · Pediatric Quality and Safety · doi:10.1097/pq9.0000000000000538 · Cited by 13
Hannum, S. M., Abebe, E., Xiao, Y., Brown, R., Peña, I. J. V., & Gürses, A. P. (2020) · Applied Ergonomics · doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2020.103299 · Cited by 12
Self-citationHoldsworth, L. M., Kling, S. M. R., Smith, M. A., Safaeinili, N., Shieh, L. Y., Vilendrer, S. M., Garvert, D. W., Winget, M., Asch, S. M., & Li, R. (2021) · JMIR Research Protocols · doi:10.2196/27532 · Cited by 13
“The SEIPS framework characterizes outcomes as a product of a work system made up of factors related to the internal and external environment, people, organization, tools and technology, tasks, and work processes [8].”
Self-citationPerformance obstacles of nurses in intensive care units of Greek National Health System hospitals
Aletras, V. H., & Kallianidou, K. (2014) · Nursing in Critical Care · doi:10.1111/nicc.12115 · Cited by 12
The Application of Human Factors Engineering to Reduce Operating Room Turnover in Robotic Surgery
Cohen, T., Anger, J. T., Shamash, K., et al. (2022) · World Journal of Surgery · doi:10.1007/s00268-022-06487-z · Cited by 12
“Researchers utilized the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) model (a widely used model in the field of HF that emphasizes that all elements of a system including humans, tools and technology, tasks, environments, and organizations interact with one another to produce various processes and outcom…”
BackgroundMethodTu, R., Elling, H., Behnke, N. L., Tseka, J., Kafanikhale, H., Mofolo, I. A., Hoffman, I., & Cronk, R. (2022) · H2Open Journal · doi:10.2166/h2oj.2022.139 · Cited by 13
A pilot study of non-routine events in gynecological surgery: Type, impact, and effect
Law, K. E., Hildebrand, E. A., Hawthorne, H. J., et al. (2018) · Gynecologic Oncology · doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2018.11.035 · Cited by 12
Dunn, W. F., Deutsch, E. S., Maxworthy, J., et al. (2013) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-5993-4_10 · Cited by 12
van Engen-Verheul, M. M., Peek, N. B., Haafkens, J. A., Joukes, E., Vromen, T., Jaspers, M., & de Keizer, N. F. (2016) · International Journal of Medical Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2016.10.003 · Cited by 12
Shah, J. D., Wang, F., Kest, J., et al. (2021) · Journal of Craniofacial Surgery · doi:10.1097/scs.0000000000007933 · Cited by 12
“There is growing evidence of a correlation between improvements in ergonomics and positive impact on organizational outcomes such as health, safety, satisfaction, stress, and burnout, and patient outcomes including care and safety.(3,4) Consequently, ergonomics and its implementation has emerged an important and urgen…”
BackgroundA Qualitative Protocol to Examine Resilience Culture in Healthcare Teams during COVID-19
Ambrose, J. W., Layne, D. M., Catchpole, K. C., Evans, H. L., & Nemeth, L. S. (2021) · Healthcare · doi:10.3390/healthcare9091168 · Cited by 12
Human Factors Analysis of Latent Safety Threats in a Pediatric Critical Care Unit*
Trbovich, P. L., Tomasi, J. N., Kolodzey, L., et al. (2021) · Pediatric Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1097/pcc.0000000000002832 · Cited by 13
Exploring extended scope of practice in dietetics: A systems approach
Ryan, D., Pelly, F. E., & Purcell, E. (2016) · Nutrition & Dietetics · doi:10.1111/1747-0080.12283 · Cited by 12
Høyland, S. A., Holte, K. A., Gressgård, L. J., Hansen, K., & Solberg, A. (2018) · Applied Ergonomics · doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2018.12.005 · Cited by 14
Recommendations for health information technology implementation in rural hospitals
Huang, Y.-H., & Gramopadhye, A. K. (2016) · International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance · doi:10.1108/ijhcqa-09-2015-0115 · Cited by 14
Barton, H. J., Maru, A., Leaf, M. A., Hekman, D. J., Wiegmann, D. A., Shah, M. N., & Patterson, B. W. (2024) · JMIR Human Factors · doi:10.2196/52592 · Cited by 14
“…be valuable across a variety of health care domains and in supporting the design of technologies—the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) model—conceptualizes the work of clinicians as happening in a work system , which invariably influences care processes and outcomes [35-37].”
Background(2024) · Journal of System and Management Sciences · doi:10.33168/jsms.2024.0212 · Cited by 12
Quality in radiotherapy: effective treatment and patient safety
Nascimento, A., & Falzon, P. (2012) · Work · doi:10.3233/wor-2012-0414-1956 · Cited by 12
“Even though scientific and technological progress has contributed to improving healthcare in terms of clinical effectiveness, the gains for patient health are accompanied by the presence of new risks for patient safety[3-4].”
BackgroundExploring the effect of complex patients on care delivery tasks
Ozkaynak, M., Johnson, S. A., Tulu, B., Donovan, J. L., Kanaan, A. O., & Rose, A. J. (2015) · International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance · doi:10.1108/ijhcqa-11-2014-0105 · Cited by 12
Eerd, D. V., Ferron, E. M., D’Elia, T., Morgan, D., Ziesmann, F., & Amick, B. C. (2017) · Applied Ergonomics · doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2017.10.015 · Cited by 13
PERCEIVED IMPACT OF CARE MANAGERS’ WORK ON PATIENT AND CLINICIAN OUTCOMES
Carayon, P., Hundt, A. S., Hoonakker, P., Kianfar, S., Alyousef, B., Salek, D., Cartmill, R. S., Walker, J. M., & Tomcavage, J. F. (2015) · European Journal for Person Centered Healthcare · doi:10.5750/ejpch.v3i2.903 · Cited by 12
“To systematically examine care managers’ activities, we use the work system model developed by Smith and Carayon [15–17] and later expanded into the SEIPS model [18] for application to patient safety.”
MethodSelf-citationHuman Factors and Organizational Issues in Health Informatics: Innovations and Opportunities
Marquard, J. L. (2021) · Yearbook of Medical Informatics · doi:10.1055/s-0041-1726511 · Cited by 12
“0, a “sociotechnical work system → process outcomes” model based on the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety model (SEIPS), helps HF/E researchers and practitioners capture and evaluate the system elements impacting and being impacted by health informatics technologies [137, 138].”
MethodA ubiquitous situation-aware data visualization dashboard to reduce ICU clinician cognitive load
Faiola, A. J., Srinivas, P., & Doebbeling, B. N. (2015) · IEEE International Conference on e-Health Networking, Applications and Services (Healthcom) · doi:10.1109/healthcom.2015.7454540 · Cited by 12
“In this regard, the interrelationship between clinical workflow [3,4,5] and cognitive load [6,7], directly impact critical care and patient safety [8].”
Backgroundvan Nie‐Visser, N. C., Meijers, J. M. M., Schols, J. M. G. A., Lohrmann, C., Spreeuwenberg, M. D., & Halfens, R. J. G. (2014) · Clinical Nutrition · doi:10.1016/j.clnu.2014.12.003 · Cited by 12
“In Donabedian's model [11] the structure of care comprises the organizational structure, the material resources (environment, technology) and the human resources (care provider, tasks) [31].”
BackgroundExperiences of technology integration in home care nursing.
Johnson, K. A., Valdez, R. S., Casper, G. R., et al. (2008) · PubMed · Cited by 12
Self-citationElling, H., Behnke, N. L., Tseka, J., et al. (2022) · Journal of Water Sanitation and Hygiene for Development · doi:10.2166/washdev.2022.206 · Cited by 12
“Qualitative thematic analysis and organization: SEIPS model We applied the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) model to organize the coded results (Carayon et al. 2006; Holden et al. 2013).”
MethodDEEP SCOPE: A Framework for Safe Healthcare Design
Taylor, E., & Hignett, S. M. (2021) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph18157780 · Cited by 11
“The strength of sequential thinking for accident causation is the etiology of accidents and adverse events with descriptions of contributing factors, while the lack of discussion of processes and guidance for system redesign is a weakness [10].”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialSociotechnical Work System Approach to Occupational Fatigue
Watterson, T. L., Steege, L. M. B., Mott, D. A., Ford, J. H., Portillo, E. C., & Chui, M. A. (2023) · The Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety · doi:10.1016/j.jcjq.2023.05.007 · Cited by 17
Michell, V. A., Tehrani, J., & Liu, K. (2012) · Health Policy and Technology · doi:10.1016/j.hlpt.2012.10.003 · Cited by 12
“staff, tools, equipment and resources together with their organisational management and administrative processes critically impacts patient safety [3,4].”
BackgroundSystems safety in nonoperating room anesthesia locations
Tobin, C., & Bridges, K. H. (2022) · Current Opinion in Anaesthesiology · doi:10.1097/aco.0000000000001160 · Cited by 11
Alfred, M. C., Cohen, T., Cohen, K. A., Kanji, F. F., Choi, E. K., Gaizo, J. D., Nemeth, L. S., Alekseyenko, A. V., Shouhed, D., Savage, S. J., et al. (2020) · JMIR Research Protocols · doi:10.2196/25284 · Cited by 11
“Human factors engineering techniques, which have been applied across many different industries to improve safety and performance [21], can be used to identify and alleviate risks in RAS.”
Tiruneh, C. T., & Woldeyohannes, F. W. (2022) · HIV/AIDS - Research and Palliative Care · doi:10.2147/hiv.s348254 · Cited by 12
“The Donabedian model has potential limitations of sequential progression from structure to process to the outcome which has been described by some as too linear of a framework(12) and consequently has a limited utility for recognising how the three domains influence and interact with each other.(13) Methods Study Area…”
MethodRutkowski, R. A., Scheer, E. R., Carlson, C., Parks, R., Pulia, M. S., Patterson, B. W., Shah, M. N., Hoonakker, P., Carayon, P., Smith, M. A., et al. (2023) · Human Factors in Healthcare · doi:10.1016/j.hfh.2023.100059 · Cited by 11
Self-citationWhat do visitors know and how do they feel about contact precautions?
Seibert, G., Ewers, T., Barker, A., et al. (2017) · American Journal of Infection Control · doi:10.1016/j.ajic.2017.05.011 · Cited by 11
Pugh, C. M. (2019) · Annals of Translational Medicine · doi:10.21037/atm.2019.01.83 · Cited by 11
“) and a wide variety of data management systems (1).”
BackgroundUsing of Group-Modeling in Predesign Phase of New Healthcare Environments
Elf, M., Eldh, A. C., Malmqvist, I., Öhrn, K., & von Koch, L. (2015) · HERD Health Environments Research & Design Journal · doi:10.1177/1937586715599650 · Cited by 11
“holistic and systems-oriented approach to determine the role of design as one component of a healthcare system (Carayon et al., 2006; Ferris, 2013).”
BackgroundReducing delays to diagnosis in ambulatory care settings: A macrocognition perspective
Patterson, E. S., Su, G., & Sarkar, U. (2019) · Applied Ergonomics · doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2019.102965 · Cited by 11
“In Carayon and colleagues’ influential Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) model (Carayon et al., 2006), they defined the relationships of key elements of the Safety-II perspective.”
BackgroundKekkonen, P. M., Pohjosenperä, T., Kantola, H., & Vayrynen, S. T. (2018) · Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries · doi:10.1002/hfm.20728 · Cited by 11
“for change (Kaplan & Porter, 2011) and a positive outcome of a well-functioning work system (Carayon et al., 2006).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialPhysician Perceptions of the Electronic Problem List in Pediatric Trauma Care
Hose, B., Hoonakker, P., Wooldridge, A. R., et al. (2019) · Applied Clinical Informatics · doi:10.1055/s-0039-1677737 · Cited by 11
Self-citationWeiler, D. T., Lingg, A. J., Eagan, B. R., Shaffer, D. W., & Werner, N. E. (2022) · Ergonomics · doi:10.1080/00140139.2022.2051609 · Cited by 11
Kearney, J., Muir, C., Salmon, P. M., & Smith, K. L. (2024) · Safety Science · doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2024.106419 · Cited by 11
Work System Design in Health Care
Carayon, P., Alvarado, C. J., & Hundt, A. S. (2011) · CRC Press eBooks · doi:10.1201/b11219-12 · Cited by 11
Self-citationBarbeito, A., Lau, W. T., Weitzel, N. S., et al. (2014) · Anesthesia & Analgesia · doi:10.1213/ane.0000000000000359 · Cited by 11
Xie, A., Woods-Hill, C. Z., King, A. F., et al. (2017) · Journal of the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society · doi:10.1093/jpids/pix097 · Cited by 11
“0 model (eg, people, tasks, tools and technologies, physical environment, organization, external environment) [16] were used to elicit factors that influence BC-ordering decision making.”
MethodSelf-citationBenjamin, E., & Giuliano, K. K. (2024) · JMIR Human Factors · doi:10.2196/60176 · Cited by 18
“SEIPS builds upon Donabedian’s classic System-Process-Outcomes model [27] to further explicate the elements of work systems, work processes, and work outcomes [23].”
InfluentialZhang, X., DeSantes, K., Dodge, A., Larson, M., Eickhoff, J. C., Moreno, M. A., & Peterson, A. L. H. (2021) · Pediatric Cardiology · doi:10.1007/s00246-021-02767-y · Cited by 11
“1 3 a framework to enhance patient safety and health outcome [8].”
BackgroundTelemedicine in Africa: Applications, Opportunities, and Challenges
Onsongo, S., & Kagotho, E. (2024) · Biomedical engineering · doi:10.5772/intechopen.1005094 · Cited by 12
Fierro, J. L., Herrick, H. M., Fregene, N., Khan, A. N., Ferro, D. F., Nelson, M. N., Brent, C. R., Bonafide, C. P., & DeMauro, S. B. (2021) · Pediatric Pulmonology · doi:10.1002/ppul.25722 · Cited by 11
“Outpatient clinic 44 (57) 4 (5) 6 (8) 8 (10) 11 (14) 4 (5)”
InfluentialAvallone, M. A., & Weideman, Y. L. (2015) · Journal of Nursing Education and Practice · doi:10.5430/jnep.v5n8p65 · Cited by 11
Pulia, M. S., Schwei, R. J., Hesse, S., & Werner, N. E. (2022) · Antimicrobial Stewardship & Healthcare Epidemiology · doi:10.1017/ash.2022.316 · Cited by 11
Langdalen, H., Abrahamsen, E. B., & Abrahamsen, H. B. (2020) · Reliability Engineering & System Safety · doi:10.1016/j.ress.2020.106909 · Cited by 11
Lamé, G., Liberati, E. G., Burt, J., Draycott, T. J., Winter, C., Ward, J., & Dixon‐Woods, M. (2019) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2019-030271 · Cited by 11
“Depending on the nature of the findings, frameworks such as the Yorkshire and SEIPS frameworks may be used to support the analysis.(31) 38 In the second phase of analysis, the researchers will integrate their analyses.”
MethodCommunication networks of medication management in an ambulatory care setting
Kjos, A. L., & Bryant, G. A. (2018) · Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy · doi:10.1016/j.sapharm.2018.04.010 · Cited by 11
Werner, N. E., Rutkowski, R. A., Krause, S. A., et al. (2021) · Applied Ergonomics · doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2021.103509 · Cited by 11
Self-citationHuman factors in anaesthetic crisis
Chandran, R. (2014) · World Journal of Anesthesiology · doi:10.5313/wja.v3.i3.203 · Cited by 11
Quality of nursing care in Saudi's healthcare transformation era: A nursing perspective
Alkorashy, H. A. E., & Al‐Hothaly, W. A. (2022) · The International Journal of Health Planning and Management · doi:10.1002/hpm.3425 · Cited by 11
Chenani, K. T., Nodoushan, R. J., Jahangiri, M., Madadizadeh, F., & Fallah, H. (2022) · International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics · doi:10.1080/10803548.2021.2018856 · Cited by 12
Saad, A., Alsadi, J., Al-Absi, D. T., et al. (2024) · Journal of Safety Science and Resilience · doi:10.1016/j.jnlssr.2024.04.003 · Cited by 11
Implementation of participatory organizational change in long term care to improve safety
Eerd, D. V., D’Elia, T., Ferron, E. M., Robson, L. S., & Amick, B. C. (2021) · Journal of Safety Research · doi:10.1016/j.jsr.2021.05.002 · Cited by 14
Hatch, L. D., Rivard, M., Bolton, J., Sala, C., Araya, W., Markham, M. H., France, D. J., & Grubb, P. H. (2018) · The Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety · doi:10.1016/j.jcjq.2018.11.003 · Cited by 11
A human factors systems approach to understanding team-based primary care: a qualitative analysis
Mundt, M. P., & Swedlund, M. P. (2016) · Family Practice · doi:10.1093/fampra/cmw093 · Cited by 13
Rucci, J. M., Ball, S. L., Brunner, J., Moldestad, M., Cutrona, S. L., Sayre, G. G., & Rinne, S. T. (2023) · Journal of General Internal Medicine · doi:10.1007/s11606-023-08284-3 · Cited by 10
“Complex sociotechnical systems can impact employees in unpredictable ways 23 ; participants described how these separate stressors on the healthcare system interacted, hindering efficient delivery of patient care.”
BackgroundWorkflow, Turbulence, and Cognitive Complexity
Jennings, B. M. (2021) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-69063-2_5 · Cited by 10
Abraham, O., LeMay, S., Nixon, G., Braun, A. T., Decker, C. A., & Szela, L. (2021) · Journal of the American Pharmacists Association · doi:10.1016/j.japh.2021.04.006 · Cited by 10
Tarpey, R. J., & Mullarkey, M. T. (2021) · IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management · doi:10.1109/tem.2021.3059590 · Cited by 10
“between these entities as the work system affects how work is done in a process, which, in turn, affects outcomes [19].”
BackgroundSafety challenges of medical equipment in nurse anaesthetist training in Haiti
Santos, A. L. R., Wauben, L. S. G. L., Guilavogui, S., et al. (2015) · Applied Ergonomics · doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2015.06.011 · Cited by 10
Albanese, M. A., Mejicano, G. C., Xakellis, G. C., et al. (2009) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/acm.0b013e3181ade83c · Cited by 10
Goedken, C. C., McKinley, L. L., Balkenende, E., et al. (2022) · Antimicrobial Stewardship & Healthcare Epidemiology · doi:10.1017/ash.2022.261 · Cited by 10
Salahuddin, L. B., Ismail, Z., Ghani, M. K. A., Aboobaider, B. M., & Basari, A. S. H. (2019) · Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice · doi:10.1111/jep.13326 · Cited by 10
Prevention of Failure to Rescue in Obstetric Patients: A Realist Review
Bernstein, S., Kelechi, T. J., Catchpole, K., & Nemeth, L. S. (2021) · Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing · doi:10.1111/wvn.12531 · Cited by 11
Care Managers’ Challenges in Using Multiple Health IT Applications
Alyousef, B., Carayon, P., Hoonakker, P., Hundt, A. S., Cartmill, R. S., Tomcavage, J. F., Salek, D., Hassol, A., Chaundy, K., Younkin, J., et al. (2012) · Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting · doi:10.1177/1071181312561350 · Cited by 10
“The challenges are related to various work system elements (Carayon et al., 2006; Carayon & Smith, 2000; Smith & Carayon-Sainfort, 1989) including organizational barriers, technology design, skills and knowledge of the care managers, and task performance demands.”
BackgroundMethodSelf-citationAn Introduction to Systems Thinking
McGlacken-Byrne, D., Larkan, F., Mannan, H., Vallières, F., & Kodate, N. (2022) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198799498.003.0001 · Cited by 10
Barnett, M. L., Mehrotra, A., Frolkis, J. P., Spinks, M., Steiger, C. E., Hehir, B., Greenberg, J. O., & Singh, H. (2015) · Journal of General Internal Medicine · doi:10.1007/s11606-015-3516-y · Cited by 11
Neves, T. M. A., Parreira, P., Rodrigues, V. J. L., & Graveto, J. (2021) · Journal of Nursing Management · doi:10.1111/jonm.13263 · Cited by 12
Kates, A., Knobloch, M. J., Konkel, A., et al. (2021) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0258290 · Cited by 10
“To do this, we adapted the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) model [16] for an agricultural setting.”
Musuuza, J., Roberts, T. J., Hundt, A. S., Carayon, P., Zimbric, M. L., Schuetz, V., Reppen, M. L., Smith, W., Koffarnus, K., Brown, R., et al. (2020) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0232062 · Cited by 10
“[16] In order to get an in-depth understanding of contextual factors, this project was guided by the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) [17] model, which describes context as various aspects of systems that interact to influence patient safety [17–22].”
MethodSelf-citationMedication Discrepancy Risk Factors for Pediatric Patients With Epilepsy at Hospital Admission
Louiselle, K., Harte, L., Thompson, C., et al. (2021) · The Journal of Pediatric Pharmacology and Therapeutics · doi:10.5863/1551-6776-26.4.384 · Cited by 10
Using Simulation to Improve Systems
Kearney, J. A., & Deutsch, E. S. (2017) · Otolaryngologic Clinics of North America · doi:10.1016/j.otc.2017.05.011 · Cited by 10
Durso, F. T., Ferguson, A. N., Kazi, S., Cunningham, C., & Ryan, C. (2014) · Applied Ergonomics · doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2014.09.002 · Cited by 12
Metadata
- Authors
- Carayon, P., Schoofs Hundt, A., Karsh, B.-T., Gurses, A. P., Alvarado, C. J., Smith, M., & Flatley Brennan, P.
- Affiliations
- University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
- Corresponding author
- Carayon, P
- ORCID
- Venue
- Quality in Health Care
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2006-12
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- suppl 1
- Pages
- i50-i58
- ISSN
- 1475-3898 (ISSN-L)
- 1475-3901
- PMC
- PMC2464868
- OpenAlex
- W2163767758
- Semantic Scholar
- d1341354adecf3074cdce8d706ccfec017ac370f
- Cited by
- 1,795
- References
- 53
- Citations by year
- 2026: 199 · 2025: 140 · 2024: 129 · 2023: 122 · 2022: 119 · 2021: 150 · 2020: 132 · 2019: 118 · 2018: 102 · 2017: 93 · 2016: 97 · 2015: 70 · 2014: 77 · 2013: 66 · 2012: 50
- FWCI
- 4.54
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- BMJ Quality & Safety (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (#P20 HS11561-01, P20 HS011561)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Patient Safety and Medication Errors
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Healthcare Quality and Management
- Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Ergonomics and Human Factors
- Keywords
- work system design, patient safety, SEIPS model, health care system, outpatient surgery, safety culture
- MeSH terms
- Humans, Ergonomics, Models, Theoretical, Quality Assurance, Health Care, Surgicenters, Systems Analysis, Task Performance and Analysis, United States, Outcome Assessment, Health Care, Safety Management, Medical Errors
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-11, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-11 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
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
