ArticleThe Journal of hand surgery2014
Addressing medical errors in hand surgery.
Article in The Journal of hand surgery, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Spatio-temporally modulated fluorescence imager for intraoperative nerve identification.Journal of biomedical optics · 2026Article
- A Comparative Risk Analysis of Malpractice Claims in Hand Surgeons Trained in Plastic and Orthopedic Surgery.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2026Article
- Wrist malpractice claims in Northern Norway 2005-2014. Lessons to be learned.International journal of circumpolar health · 2018Article
- Evaluation of collimated polarized light imaging for real-time intraoperative selective nerve identification in the human hand.Biomedical optics express · 2017Article
- Litigation and Malpractice in Carpal Tunnel Surgery: An Analysis of 60 Successful Claims Over a 10-Year Period (2002-2012).Journal of hand and microsurgery · 2016Article
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
Abstract
Influential think tanks such as the Institute of Medicine have raised awareness about the implications of medical errors. In response, organizations, medical societies, and hospitals have initiated programs to decrease the incidence and prevent adverse effects of these errors. Surgeons deal with the direct implications of adverse events involving patients. In addition to managing the physical consequences, they are confronted with ethical and social issues when caring for a harmed patient. Although there is considerable effort to implement system-wide changes, there is little guidance for hand surgeons on how to address medical errors. Admitting an error by a physician is difficult, but a transparent environment where patients are notified of errors and offered consolation and compensation is essential to maintain physician-patient trust. Furthermore, equipping hand surgeons with a guide for addressing medical errors will help identify system failures, provide learning points for safety improvement, decrease litigation against physicians, and demonstrate a commitment to ethical and compassionate medical care.
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.