Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 330

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 19 of the 19 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Attitudes of doctors and nurses towards incident reporting: a qualitative analysis

Kingston, Marilyn J, Evans, Sue M, Smith, Brian J, Berry, Jesia G·2004·Medical Journal of Australia

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: (i) To examine attitudes of medical and nursing staff towards reporting incidents (adverse events and near-misses), and (ii) to identify measures to facilitate incident reporting. DESIGN: Qualitative study. In March 2002, semistructured questions were administered to five focus groups--one each for consultants, registrars, resident medical officers, senior nurses, and junior nurses. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: 14 medical and 19 nursing staff recruited using purposive sampling from three metropolitan public hospitals in Adelaide, South Australia. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Attitudes and barriers to incident reporting; differences in reporting behaviour between disciplines; how to facilitate incident reporting. RESULTS: Cultural differences between doctors and nurses, identified using Triandis' theory of social behaviour, were found to underpin attitudes to incident reporting. Nurses reported more habitually than doctors due to a culture which provided directives, protocols and the notion of security, whereas the medical culture was less transparent, favoured dealing with incidents "in-house" and was less reliant on directives. Common barriers to reporting incidents included time constraints, unsatisfactory processes, deficiencies in knowledge, cultural norms, inadequate feedback, beliefs about risk, and a perceived lack of value in the process. CONCLUSIONS: Strategies to improve incident reporting must address cultural issues.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5694/j.1326-5377.2004.tb06158.x

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

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

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 19 references

Cited by

See all 330

Metadata

Authors
Kingston, M. J., Evans, S. M., Smith, B. J., & Berry, J. G.
Venue
Medical Journal of Australia
Publisher
AMPCo
Published
2004-07
Volume
181
Issue
1
Pages
36-39
ISSN
  • 0025-729X (ISSN-L)
  • 1326-5377
OpenAlex
W1936883687
Cited by
330
References
19
FWCI
14.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Attitudes of doctors and nurses towards incident reporting: a qualitative analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5694/j.1326-5377.2004.tb06158.x
The paper
Kingston, M. J., Evans, S. M., Smith, B. J., & Berry, J. G. (2004). Attitudes of doctors and nurses towards incident reporting: a qualitative analysis. Medical Journal of Australia. https://doi.org/10.5694/j.1326-5377.2004.tb06158.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.