Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 290

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Health Plan Members' Views about Disclosure of Medical Errors

Mazor, Kathleen M., Simon, Steven R., Yood, Robert A., Martinson, Brian C., Gunter, Margaret J., Reed, George W., Gurwitz, Jerry H.·2004·Annals of Internal Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Various authorities and national organizations encourage disclosing medical errors, but there is little information on how patients respond to disclosure. OBJECTIVE: To examine how the type of error, severity of adverse clinical outcome, and level of disclosure affect patients' responses to error and disclosure. DESIGN: Mail questionnaire survey (8 versions were developed) varying 3 factors in a completely crossed, randomized, factorial design. Each questionnaire included a vignette describing 1) a medical error (failure to check for penicillin allergy or inadequate monitoring of antiepileptic medication); 2) an associated clinical outcome (life-threatening or less serious); and 3) a physician-patient dialogue, with either full disclosure (acceptance of responsibility and an apology) or nondisclosure (expression of regret without acceptance of responsibility or an apology). SETTING: New England-based health plan. PARTICIPANTS: Random sample of 1500 adult members received the questionnaire, with a 66% response rate. MEASUREMENTS: Likelihood of changing physicians, likelihood of seeking legal advice, ratings of patient satisfaction, trust and emotional reaction in response to a vignette and dialogue, and views on medical error and disclosure. RESULTS: Full disclosure reduced the reported likelihood of changing physicians and increased patient satisfaction, trust, and positive emotional response. Full disclosure reduced the reported likelihood of seeking legal advice in only 1 error-and-outcome vignette. In the other vignettes, the percentage of patients indicating that they would seek legal advice was relatively high even with full disclosure. Almost all respondents (98.8%) wanted to be told of errors, most (83%) favored financial compensation if harm occurred, and few (12.7%) favored compensation if no harm occurred. LIMITATIONS: Since the study was done in the context of a managed care plan in one geographic area, it could not assess whether the results are generalizable to other populations. In addition, it could not determine whether responses to the simulated situations used predict responses to real situations. CONCLUSIONS: Patients will probably respond more favorably to physicians who fully disclose medical errors than to physicians who are less forthright, but the specifics of the case and the severity of the clinical outcome also affect patients' responses. In some circumstances, the desire to seek legal advice may not diminish despite full disclosure.

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 · 10.7326/0003-4819-140-6-200403160-00006

Cites

2 of 2 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 2 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Mazor, K. M., Simon, S. R., Yood, R. A., Martinson, B. C., Gunter, M. J., Reed, G. W., & Gurwitz, J. H.
Venue
Annals of Internal Medicine
Published
2004-03-16
Volume
140
Issue
6
Pages
409-418
ISSN
  • 0003-4819 (ISSN-L)
  • 1539-3704
OpenAlex
W2101657902
Cited by
290
References
2
FWCI
30.60
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

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.