ArticleBMJ open2021
Responses of physicians to an objective safety and quality knowledge test: a cross-sectional study.
Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveFor physicians to practice safe high quality medicine they must have sufficient safety and quality knowledge. Although a great deal is known about the safety and quality perceptions, attitudes and beliefs of physicians, little is known about their safety and quality knowledge. This study tested the objective safety and quality knowledge of practicing US primary care physicians.
designCross-sectional objective test of safety and quality knowledge.
settingPrimary care physicians practicing in the USA.
participantsStudy consisted of 518 US practicing primary care physicians who answered an email invitation. Fifty-four percent were family medicine and 46% were internal medicine physicians.The response rate was 66%.
interventionThe physicians took a 24-question multiple-choice test over the internet. OUTCOME: The outcome was the percent correct.
resultsThe average number of correct answers was 11.4 (SD, 2.69), 48% correct. Three common clinical vignettes questions were answered correctly by 45% of the physicians. Five common radiation exposures questions were answered correctly by 40% of the physicians. Seven common healthcare quality and safety questions were answered correctly by 43% of the physicians. Seven Donabedian's model of structure, process and outcome measure questions were answered correctly by 67% of the physicians. Two Institute of Medicine's definitions of quality and safety questions were answered correctly by 19.5% of the physicians.
conclusionForty-eight per cent of the physicians' answers to the objective safety and quality questions were correct. To our knowledge, this is the first assessment of the objective safety and quality knowledge of practicing US primary care physicians.
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.