ArticleThe European journal of general practice2015
Involving patients in patient safety programmes: A scoping review and consensus procedure 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 23 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
23 citing papers in PubMed.
- Patients' and healthcare workers' recommendations for a surgical patient safety checklist - a qualitative study.BMC health services research · 2020Trial
- Engaging patients throughout the continuum of implementation science and practice: adapted evidence mapping review and practical guide for clinicians and researchers.Health research policy and systems · 2026Article
- Predictors of adverse event reporting intention among primary care nurses: a multi-center study in China.BMC nursing · 2025Article
- Patient and family engagement in patient safety in the Eastern Mediterranean Region: a scoping review.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Embedding Patient-Centricity by Collaborating with Patients to Transform the Rare Disease Ecosystem.Pharmaceutical medicine · 2023Article
- How to engage patients in achieving patient safety: A qualitative study from healthcare professionals' perspective.Heliyon · 2023Article
- Development and validation of patients' surgical safety checklist.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Patient-completed safety checklists as an empowerment tool for patient involvement in patient safety: concepts, considerations and recommendations.Future healthcare journal · 2021Article
- Validation and initial results of surveys exploring perspectives on risks and solutions for diagnostic and medication errors in primary care in Sweden.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2020Article
- Evaluation of a Patient-Centered Fall-Prevention Tool Kit to Reduce Falls and Injuries: A Nonrandomized Controlled Trial.JAMA network open · 2020Article
- Scoping review of patients' attitudes about their role and behaviours to ensure safe care at the direct care level.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2020Article
- Patient and provider perspectives on reducing risk of harm in primary health care: a qualitative questionnaire study in Sweden.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2020Article
- Article
- Article
- Diagnostic errors reported in primary healthcare and emergency departments: A retrospective and descriptive cohort study of 4830 reported cases of preventable harm in Sweden.The European journal of general practice · 2019Article
- Influences on the adoption of patient safety innovation in primary care: a qualitative exploration of staff perspectives.BMC family practice · 2018Article
- Evaluation of Patient and Family Engagement Strategies to Improve Medication Safety.The patient · 2018Review
- Patient safety culture in care homes for older people: a scoping review.BMC health services research · 2017Article
- A developed model of cancer patients participation in intravenous chemotherapy safety.Oncotarget · 2017Article
- Identifying patient-centred recommendations for improving patient safety in General Practices in England: a qualitative content analysis of free-text responses using the Patient Reported Experiences and Outcomes of Safety in Primary Care (PREOS-PC) questionnaire.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2017Article
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
backgroundPatient involvement has only recently received attention as a potentially useful approach to patient safety in primary care.
objectiveTo summarize work conducted on a scoping review of interventions focussing on patient involvement for patient safety; to develop consensus-based recommendations in this area.
methodsScoping review of the literature 2006-2011 about methods and effects of involving patients in patient safety in primary care identified evidence for previous experiences of patient involvement in patient safety. This information was fed back to an expert panel for the development of recommendations for healthcare professionals and policy makers.
resultsThe scoping review identified only weak evidence in support of the effectiveness of patient involvement. Identified barriers included a number of patient factors but also the healthcare workers' attitudes, abilities and lack of training. The expert panel recommended the integration of patient safety in the educational curricula for healthcare professionals, and expected a commitment from professionals to act as first movers by inviting and encouraging the patients to take an active role. The panel proposed a checklist to be used by primary care clinicians at the point of care for promoting patient involvement.
conclusionThere is only weak evidence on the effectiveness of patient involvement in patient safety. The recommendations of the panel can inform future policy and practice on patient involvement in safety in primary 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.