ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2014
Developing a preliminary 'never event' list for general practice using consensus-building methods.
Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Identifying a list of healthcare 'never events' to effect system change: a systematic review and narrative synthesis.BMJ open quality · 2023Pooled it
- Understanding patient safety in dentistry: evaluating the present and envisioning the future-a narrative review.BMJ open quality · 2024Review
- Defining healthcare never events to effect system change: A protocol for systematic review.PloS one · 2022Article
- Never Events in UK General Practice: A Survey of the Views of General Practitioners on Their Frequency and Acceptability as a Safety Improvement Approach.Journal of patient safety · 2019Article
- Article
- 'The big buzz': a qualitative study of how safe care is perceived, understood and improved in general practice.BMC family practice · 2018Article
- Dentists are humans too - education in human factors within dental care.British dental journal · 2018Article
- Developing agreement on never events in primary care dentistry: an international eDelphi study.British dental journal · 2018Article
- Content analysis of 50 clinical negligence claims involving test results management systems in general practice.BMJ open quality · 2018Article
- Patient safety in dentistry: development of a candidate 'never event' list for primary care.British dental journal · 2017Article
- Patient safety research in primary care: where are we now?The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2015Article
- Harms from discharge to primary care: mixed methods analysis of incident reports.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2015Review
- General practice performance in referral for suspected cancer: influence of number of cases and case-mix on publicly reported data.British journal of cancer · 2015Article
- Quality improvement and person-centredness: a participatory mixed methods study to develop the 'always event' concept for primary care.BMJ open · 2015Article
- Patient safety and general practice: traversing the tightrope.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2014Article
- Risky business.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe 'never event' concept has been implemented in many acute hospital settings to help prevent serious patient safety incidents. Benefits include increasing awareness of highly important patient safety risks among the healthcare workforce, promoting proactive implementation of preventive measures, and facilitating incident reporting.
aimTo develop a preliminary list of never events for general practice. DESIGN AND
settingApplication of a range of consensus-building methods in Scottish and UK general practices.
methodA total of 345 general practice team members suggested potential never events. Next, 'informed' staff (n =15) developed criteria for defining never events and applied the criteria to create a list of candidate never events. Finally, UK primary care patient safety 'experts' (n = 17) reviewed, refined, and validated a preliminary list via a modified Delphi group and by completing a content validity index exercise.
resultsThere were 721 written suggestions received as potential never events. Thematic categorisation reduced this to 38. Five criteria specific to general practice were developed and applied to produce 11 candidate never events. The expert group endorsed a preliminary list of 10 items with a content validity index (CVI) score of >80%.
conclusionA preliminary list of never events was developed for general practice through practitioner experience and consensus-building methods. This is an important first step to determine the potential value of the never event concept in this setting. It is now intended to undertake further testing of this preliminary list to assess its acceptability, feasibility, and potential usefulness as a safety improvement intervention.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.