Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35129092›Full record

ArticleMedical education online2022

Evaluating medical students' ability to identify and report errors: finding gaps in patient safety education.

Sungjoon Lee, HyeRin Roh, Myounghun Kim, Ji Kyoung Park

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical education online, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
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

4 authors.

Sungjoon LeeDepartment of Neurosurgery, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-1675-0506
HyeRin RohDepartment of Medical Education and the Institute for Medical Humanities, Inje University College of Medicine, Busan, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-3879-709X
Myounghun KimDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Busan Paik Hospital, Inje University College of Medicine, Busan, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-4350-0078
Ji Kyoung ParkDepartment of Pediatrics, Busan Paik Hospital, inje University College of Medicine, Busan, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-8241-2302

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough there are frequent complaints of medical students' incompetence in reporting errors, few studies have examined their error-reporting abilities in the real world.

objectivesThree sub-functions of self-regulation theory were used to evaluate medical students' ability to identify errors (self-monitoring), analyse root causes (self-judgment), and devise improvement plans (self-reactions). In addition, whether students reacted differently to their errors and those of others (three sub-functions) was also examined.

methodsA total of 952 patient safety reports were reviewed retrospectively, submitted by third-year medical students between 2016 and 2018. Data were quantitatively and qualitatively analysed to investigate who committed the error, to identify the type of error and its root causes, and to find suggested improvement plans. Chi-square and Fisher's exact tests were used to compare students' responses to error origins.

resultsStudents reported other errors more frequently than their own (67.6% vs. 32.4%). They reported common critical medical errors, including errors related to engaging with patients (34.5%), invasive procedures (20.2%), and infection (18.5%). The root causes identified were more precise than the improvement plans by the students (75.5% vs. 18.4%, respectively). The students' improvement plans were not practical, especially at the patient level (25.8%). When students committed errors, they considered human factors such as fatigue, scheduling, and training as the most common root cause, focussing on improvement plans at the individual level.

conclusionsThe results suggest that students were good at self-judgment, but not at self-monitoring and self-reactions. They reacted differently, based on who committed the error. To enhance self-regulated learning, Educators should encourage students to confront their errors, reflect on their self-reactions towards errors, develop well-being with time management, and think about the meaning of patient-centredness. Finally, active participation in clinical clerkship longitudinally may provide students with opportunities to learn from their errors.

Indexed as

Clinical ClerkshipEducation, Medical, UndergraduateStudents, MedicalHumansMedical ErrorsPatient SafetyRetrospective Studiesmedical educationmedical errorsmedical studentsPatient safetyroot cause analysis

Identifiers

PMID35129092
PMCPMC8823682

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.