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
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Focus Groups as Qualitative Research
Morgan, D. (1997) · doi:10.4135/9781412984287 · Cited by 8,863
Qualitative research. Introducing focus groups.
Kitzinger, J. (1995) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.311.7000.299 · Cited by 6,939
Human error: models and management
Reason, J. (2000) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.320.7237.768 · Cited by 5,665
Leape, L. L. (1994) · PubMed · Cited by 1,961
Qualitative Analysis: Practice and Innovation
Ezzy, D. (2002) · eCite Digital Repository (University of Tasmania) · Cited by 1,754
Values, attitudes, and interpersonal behavior.
Triandis, H. C. (1980) · PubMed · Cited by 1,540
Culture: The Missing Concept in Organization Studies
Schein, E. H. (1996) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2393715 · Cited by 1,469
Leape, L. L. (1994) · JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association · doi:10.1001/jama.1994.03520230061039 · Cited by 1,425
Qualitative Research Methods: A Health Focus
Rice, P. L., & Ezzy, D. (1999) · Cited by 1,235
Reporting and preventing medical mishaps: lessons from non-medical near miss reporting systems
Barach, P. (2000) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.320.7237.759 · Cited by 1,109
Cited by
The problem with root cause analysis
Peerally, M. F., Carr, S., Waring, J., & Dixon-Woods, M. (2017) · BMJ Quality & Safety · doi:10.1136/bmjqs-2016-005511 · Cited by 398
Kirwan, M., Matthews, A., & Scott, P. A. (2013) · International Journal of Nursing Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2012.08.020 · Cited by 295
The long way ahead to achieve an effective patient safety culture: challenges perceived by nurses
Farokhzadian, J., Dehghan Nayeri, N., & Borhani, F. (2018) · BMC Health Services Research · doi:10.1186/s12913-018-3467-1 · Cited by 196
Pan, J., Ding, S., Wu, D., Yang, S., & Yang, J. (2019) · International Journal of Production Research · doi:10.1080/00207543.2018.1550272 · Cited by 130
Holden, R. J., & Karsh, B.-T. (2009) · Behaviour & Information Technology · doi:10.1080/01449290601138245 · Cited by 128
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.