SynthesisBMC family practice2016
Patients' views of adverse events in primary and ambulatory care: a systematic review to assess methods and the content of what patients consider to be adverse events.
Synthesis in BMC family practice, 2016. 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, 53 citations in OpenAlex.
- Promoting Patient Safety Through Patient Engagement at the Organisational Level: A Delphi-Based Needs Assessment Among Patient and Family Advisory Councils.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Trial
- Improving patient self-reporting of antihypertensive adverse drug events in primary care: a stepped wedge cluster randomised trial.BMC family practice · 2021Trial
- What Do Consumers Need Before, During and After a Patient Safety Incident Review? A Qualitative Study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
- Compensation claims for chiropractic in Denmark 2013-2022.Chiropractic & manual therapies · 2026Article
- Patient-Reported Incident Measure (PRIM) tools for reporting patient safety incidents: protocol for a scoping review.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Patients' Perceptions of Safety in Primary Healthcare Settings: A Cross-Sectional Study in the Qassim Region of Saudi Arabia.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Predictive Factors for Adverse Event Outcomes After Transarterial Radioembolization with Yttrium-90 Resin Microspheres in Europe: Results from the Prospective Observational CIRT Study.Cardiovascular and interventional radiology · 2023Observational
- Safe Medication in Nursing Home Residents Through the Development and Evaluation of an Intervention (SAME): Protocol for a Fully Integrated Mixed Methods Study With a Cocreative Approach.JMIR research protocols · 2023Article
- Comparing the Value of Data Visualization Methods for Communicating Harms in Clinical Trials.Epidemiologic reviews · 2022Article
- Assessing patient experience with patient safety in primary care: development and validation of the ASK-ME-questionnaire.BMJ open · 2022Article
- Patient and caregiver factors in ambulatory incident reports: a mixed-methods analysis.BMJ open quality · 2021Article
- Nature and type of patient-reported safety incidents in primary care: cross-sectional survey of patients from Australia and England.BMJ open · 2021Article
- Symptoms patients receiving manual therapy experienced and perceived as adverse: a secondary analysis of a survey of patients' perceptions of what constitutes an adverse response.The Journal of manual & manipulative therapy · 2021Article
- Validation of the Partners at Care Transitions Measure (PACT-M): assessing the quality and safety of care transitions for older people in the UK.BMC health services research · 2020Article
- Frequency and Types of Patient-Reported Errors in Electronic Health Record Ambulatory Care Notes.JAMA network open · 2020Article
- Health Care Provider Factors Associated with Patient-Reported Adverse Events and Harm.Joint Commission journal on quality and patient safety · 2020Article
- Patient safety in ambulatory care from the patient's perspective: a retrospective, representative telephone survey.BMJ open · 2020Article
- Can patients contribute to safer care in meetings with healthcare professionals? A crossBMJ quality & safety · 2019Article
- Validation of the Primary Care Patient Measure of Safety (PC PMOS) questionnaire.BMJ quality & safety · 2019Article
- Safety analysis over time: seven major changes to adverse event investigation.Implementation science : IS · 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatient safety gained widespread public attention in the last 20 years. However, most patient safety research relied upon professionals' exceptions and was realised especially in the hospital sector. Gradually patients' attention has been focused on safety campaigns in inpatient care. We aimed to better assess patients' perceptions in primary and ambulatory care.
methodsA systematic review was conducted by use of database searches with additional reference and hand searching. The search strategy implied MeSH-terms relating to adverse events, incident reporting and outpatient care. Relevant articles were selected by applying defined eligibility criteria. Studies exclusively based on hospital data as well as the professionals' point of view were excluded.
resultsWe included 19 studies. Patients were able to identify events that were traditionally recognised by the medical community as technical medical aspects (e.g. errors in diagnosis). An important field of patient participation in prevention of adverse events was proposed in the medication process. Most reported events however could be described as service quality incidents. Communication problems were shown to have implications on the occurrence of technical medical aspects and patients' satisfaction of their care. Further, unsatisfied patients were more likely to recognize adverse events.
conclusionPatients' perception of patient safety in primary and ambulatorycare broadened the previous focus on technical medical aspects. Especially communication factors played an important role in the occurrence and consequence of adverse events and patients' satisfaction. Future research should concentrate on developing possible ways to integrate patients' views and participation in ensuring safety in outpatient 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.