ArticleRevista de saude publica2020
AGRASS Questionnaire: Assessment of Risk Management in Health Care.
Article in Revista de saude publica, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Applied Research on the Effect of Risks on Public Health Building Projects' Performance: Empirical Results From Tanzania.TheScientificWorldJournal · 2026Article
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
objectiveThis study aims to assess the development and the validity analysis of the Assessment of Risk Management in Health Care Questionnaire (AGRASS).
methodsThis is a validation study of a measurement instrument following the stages: 1) Development of conceptual model and items; 2) Formal multidisciplinary assessment; 3) Nominal group for validity analysis with national specialists; 4) Development of software and national pilot study in 62 Brazilian hospitals 5) Delphi for validity analysis with the users of the questionnaire. In stages 3 and 5, the items were judged based on face validity, content validity, and utility and viability, by a 1-7 Likert scale (cut-off point: median < 6). Accuracy and reliability of the questionnaire were analyzed with the Confirmatory Factor Analysis and the Cronbach's alpha.
resultsThe initial version of the instrument (98 items) was adapted during stages 1 to 3 for the final version with 40 items, which were considered relevant, of adequate content, useful, and viable. The instrument has 2 dimensions and 9 subdimensions, and the items have closed-ended questions (yes or no). The software for the automatic collection and analysis generates indicators, tables, and automatic graphs for the assessed institution and aggregated data. The adjustment indices confirmed a bi-dimensional model composed of structure and process (X2/gl = 1.070, RMSEA ≤ 0.05 = 0.847, TLI = 0.972), with high reliability for the AGRASS Questionnaire (α = 0.94) and process dimension (α = 0.93), and adequate for the structural dimension (α = 0.70).
conclusionsThe AGRASS Questionnaire is a potentially useful instrument for the surveillance and monitoring of the risk management and patient safety in health services.
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.