Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31340968›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2019

Never events in general practice: a focus group study exploring the views of English and Scottish general practitioners of 'never events'.

Rebecca L Morris, Sudeh Cheraghi-Sohi, Paul Bowie, Aneez Esmail, Carl de Wet, Stephen M Campbell

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact, top 87% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Rebecca L MorrisCentre for Primary Care, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1587-0802
Sudeh Cheraghi-SohiCentre for Primary Care, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Paul BowieNHS Scotland, Glasgow, UK.
Aneez EsmailCentre for Primary Care, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Carl de WetSchool of Medicine, Griffith University, Nathan, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5376-2525
Stephen M CampbellCentre for Primary Care, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
University of Manchester · GBGriffith University · AUNational Health Service Scotland · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo examine general practitioner (GP) understanding of the never event (NE) concept in general practice, and to identify potential enablers and barriers to implementation in UK general practice.

designQualitative study using focus groups. The data were analysed thematically and were informed by the normalisation process theory.

settingGeneral practice in Northwest England and Southwest Scotland.

participants25 GPs took part in five focus groups. 13 GPs were female and 12 male with an age range of 28-60.

resultsThe NE approach of avoiding serious preventable adverse outcomes from healthcare fitted with participants expectations of the delivery of care but the implementation of strategies to prevent the specific NE was considered complex and variable. The main themes identified participants' understandings and perceived limitations of the NE concept; the embedded layers of responsibility to implement NE within practices and the work required for implementation within general practices. Participants' accounts highlighted the differential nature of work in general practice and that the implementation of initiatives to address specific NE should be situated within a learning and systems approach to implementation. Some NEs were considered more relevant and amenable to simple solutions than others which could influence implementation.

conclusionsThe NE concept was considered overall an important approach to help address key primary care patient safety issues. The utility of individual NEs may vary depending on the complexity of the initiatives that would be needed to manage related risks to as low as reasonably practicable.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelAdultEnglandFocus GroupsGeneral PracticeHumansMaleMedical ErrorsMiddle AgedQualitative ResearchScotlandfocus groupnever eventspatient safetyprimary careUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID31340968
PMCPMC6661597
OpenAlexW2961117063

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.