ArticleJournal of patient safety2017
Transparency When Things Go Wrong: Physician Attitudes About Reporting Medical Errors to Patients, Peers, and Institutions.
Article in Journal of patient safety, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Crowdsourced Feedback to Improve Resident Physician Error Disclosure Skills: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2024Trial
- Development of an artificial intelligence algorithm for automated detection of cardiovascular intervention-related complications.Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation · 2026Article
- Toward Safer Diagnoses: A SEIPS-Based Narrative Review of Diagnostic Errors.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Education program on medical error disclosure for emergency medicine residents using standardized patients.Korean journal of medical education · 2022Article
- Are patients knowledgeable of medical errors and medical complications? A cross-sectional study at a tertiary hospital, Riyadh.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2021Article
- Enhancing patient safety by integrating ethical dimensions to Critical Incident Reporting Systems.BMC medical ethics · 2021Article
- What Factors Impact Implementation of Critical Incident Disclosure in Ontario Hospitals: A Multiple-Case Study.Healthcare policy = Politiques de sante · 2021Article
- Disclosure of medical errors: physicians' knowledge, attitudes and practices (KAP) in an oncology center.BMC medical ethics · 2020Article
- Does a Consumer-Targeted Deprescribing Intervention Compromise Patient-Healthcare Provider Trust?Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2018Article
- Comparison of governance approaches for the control of antimicrobial resistance: Analysis of three European countries.Antimicrobial resistance and infection control · 2018Review
- The Experiences of Patients, Patient Companions, and care Providers with Ethical and Unethical Behaviors Toward Patients: A Qualitative Study.Iranian journal of nursing and midwifery researchArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTransparent communication after medical error includes disclosing the mistake to the patient, discussing the event with colleagues, and reporting to the institution. Little is known about whether attitudes about these transparency practices are related. Understanding these relationships could inform educational and organizational strategies to promote transparency.
methodsWe analyzed responses of 3038 US and Canadian physicians to a medical error communication survey. We used bivariate correlations, principal components analysis, and linear regression to determine whether and how physician attitudes about transparent communication with patients, peers, and the institution after error were related.
resultsPhysician attitudes about disclosing errors to patients, peers, and institutions were correlated (all P's < 0.001) and represented 2 principal components analysis factors, namely, communication with patients and communication with peers/institution. Predictors of attitudes supporting transparent communication with patients and peers/institution included female sex, US (vs Canadian) doctors, academic (vs private) practice, the belief that disclosure decreased likelihood of litigation, and the belief that system changes occur after error reporting. In addition, younger physicians, surgeons, and those with previous experience disclosing a serious error were more likely to agree with disclosure to patients. In comparison, doctors who believed that disclosure would decrease patient trust were less likely to agree with error disclosure to patients. Previous disclosure education was associated with attitudes supporting greater transparency with peers/institution.
conclusionsPhysician attitudes about discussing errors with patients, colleagues, and institutions are related. Several predictors of transparency affect all 3 practices and are potentially modifiable by educational and institutional strategies.
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.