ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2001
Setting up a database of medical error in general practice: conceptual and methodological considerations.
Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2001. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Proposed Set of Metrics to Reduce Patient Safety Risk From Within the Anatomic Pathology Laboratory.Laboratory medicine · 2017Article
- Can the surgical checklist reduce the risk of wrong site surgery in orthopaedics?--Can the checklist help? Supporting evidence from analysis of a national patient incident reporting system.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2011Article
- Central or local incident reporting? A comparative study in Dutch GP out-of-hours services.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2011Article
- Errors in general practice: development of an error classification and pilot study of a method for detecting errors.Quality & safety in health care · 2003Article
- Erring and learning in clinical practice.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2002Article
- Promoting patient safety in primary care. Honesty and openness may not be best policy.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2002Article
- Promoting patient safety in primary care.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2001Article
- Medical errors. Analysis of adverse events must result in improvements in care.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2001Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Though common and the cause of much morbidity and health cost, medical error has until recently attracted little attention from primary care workers. A database that logs medical error, operating within the context of clinical governance initiatives at the level of Primary Care Groups, could provide an appropriate framework within which to scrutinise and identify systematic organisational features associated with risk of serious adverse events. This paper discusses some of the key conceptual and methodological issues that need to be resolved before such a database can be implemented in general practice and considers these deliberations in the light of the Chief Medical Officer for England's recent report, An organisation with a memory.
Indexed as
Identifiers
11271876PMC1313902W1941369213What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.