ArticleBMJ open2015
System hazards in managing laboratory test requests and results in primary care: medical protection database analysis and conceptual model.
Article in BMJ open, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Defining an integrative multidimensional framework for patient complaint management systems.Frontiers in health services · 2026Review
- 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
- Why Test study protocol: a UK-wide audit using the Primary Care Academic CollaboraTive (PACT) to explore the reasons for primary care testing.BJGP open · 2022Article
- '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
- Error evaluation in the laboratory testing process and laboratory information systems.Journal of medical biochemistry · 2022Article
- Content analysis of 50 clinical negligence claims involving test results management systems in general practice.BMJ open quality · 2018Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo analyse a medical protection organisation's database to identify hazards related to general practice systems for ordering laboratory tests, managing test results and communicating test result outcomes to patients. To integrate these data with other published evidence sources to inform design of a systems-based conceptual model of related hazards.
designA retrospective database analysis.
settingGeneral practices in the UK and Ireland.
participants778 UK and Ireland general practices participating in a medical protection organisation's clinical risk self-assessment (CRSA) programme from January 2008 to December 2014.
main outcome measuresProportion of practices with system risks; categorisation of identified hazards; most frequently occurring hazards; development of a conceptual model of hazards; and potential impacts on health, well-being and organisational performance.
resultsCRSA visits were undertaken to 778 UK and Ireland general practices of which a range of systems hazards were recorded across the laboratory test ordering and results management systems in 647 practices (83.2%). A total of 45 discrete hazard categories were identified with a mean of 3.6 per practice (SD=1.94). The most frequently occurring hazard was the inadequate process for matching test requests and results received (n=350, 54.1%). Of the 1604 instances where hazards were recorded, the most frequent was at the 'postanalytical test stage' (n=702, 43.8%), followed closely by 'communication outcomes issues' (n=628, 39.1%).
conclusionsBased on arguably the largest data set currently available on the subject matter, our study findings shed new light on the scale and nature of hazards related to test results handling systems, which can inform future efforts to research and improve the design and reliability of these systems.
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.