ArticleThe European journal of general practice2015
Good practice statements on safe laboratory testing: A mixed methods study by the LINNEAUS collaboration on patient safety in primary care.
Article in The European journal of general practice, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Patient Safety Domains in Primary Healthcare: A Systematic Review.Ethiopian journal of health sciences · 2024Pooled it
- Patient safety in actioning and communicating blood test results in primary care: a UK wide audit using the Primary care Academic CollaboraTive (PACT).BMJ open quality · 2024Article
- 'I guess I'll wait to hear'- communication of blood test results in primary care a qualitative study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2022Article
- Content analysis of 50 clinical negligence claims involving test results management systems in general practice.BMJ open quality · 2018Article
- Patient safety principles in family medicine residency accreditation standards and curriculum objectives: Implications for primary care.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2016Article
- Patient safety in genomic medicine: an exploratory study.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2016Article
- Article
- Developing a research agenda for patient safety in primary care. Background, aims and output of the LINNEAUS collaboration on patient safety in primary care.The European journal of general practice · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe systems-based management of laboratory test ordering and results handling is a known source of error in primary care settings worldwide. The consequences are wide-ranging for patients (e.g. avoidable harm or poor care experience), general practitioners (e.g. delayed clinical decision making and potential medico-legal implications) and the primary care organization (e.g. increased allocation of resources to problem-solve and dealing with complaints). Guidance is required to assist care teams to minimize associated risks and improve patient safety.
objectiveTo identify, develop and build expert consensus on 'good practice' guidance statements to inform the implementation of safe systems for ordering laboratory tests and managing results in European primary care settings.
methodsMixed methods studies were undertaken in the UK and Ireland, and the findings were triangulated to develop 'good practice' statements. Expert consensus was then sought on the findings at the wider European level via a Delphi group meeting during 2013.
resultsWe based consensus on 10 safety domains and developed 77 related 'good practice' statements (≥ 80% agreement levels) judged to be essential to creating safety and minimizing risks in laboratory test ordering and subsequent results handling systems in international primary care.
conclusionGuidance was developed for improving patient safety in this important area of primary care practice. We need to consider how this guidance can be made accessible to frontline care teams, utilized by clinical educators and improvement advisers, implemented by decision makers and evaluated to determine acceptability, feasibility and impacts on patient safety.
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.