ArticleBMJ quality & safety2023
How do hospital inpatients conceptualise patient safety? A qualitative interview study using constructivist grounded theory.
Article in BMJ quality & safety, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Barriers and facilitators to feeling safe for inpatients: a model based on a qualitative meta-synthesis.Frontiers in public health · 2024Pooled it
- Collaborative safety: The impact of patient and caregiver engagement in perioperative care.PEC innovation · 2026Article
- Understanding how language barriers in the paediatric emergency care setting influences safety of care delivery: a scoping review.Emergency medicine journal : EMJ · 2026Article
- What do people do in the aftermath of healthcare-related harm? A qualitative study on experiences and factors influencing decision-making.BMJ quality & safety · 2026Article
- Development and validation and risk factor analysis of the colorectal cancer psychosocial distress scale.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- "Awakening consciousness": Safe Care Linkage Theory From a Mixed Perspective-A Constructivist Grounded Theory Study.Journal of nursing management · 2026Article
- From reporting to relating: Reimagining ePROMs in cancer symptom management.Social science & medicine (1982) · 2026Article
- Exploring Emotional Safety and Harm Among Hospitalized Patients: A Qualitative Study of Patients' and Providers' Perspectives.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Risk management during times of health uncertainty in Spain: A qualitative analysis of ethical challenges.Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis · 2025Article
- What does 'safe care' mean in the context of community-based mental health services? A qualitative exploration of the perspectives of service users, carers, and healthcare providers in England.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- What do patients and families observe about pediatric safety?: A thematic analysis of real-time narratives.Journal of hospital medicine · 2024Observational
- Patient and family contributions to improve the diagnostic process through the OurDX electronic health record tool: a mixed method analysis.BMJ quality & safety · 2024Article
- 'None of Them Know Me': A Qualitative Study of the Implications of Locum Doctor Working for Patient Experience.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024Article
- The benefits and opportunities: Engaging patients in identifying and reporting patient safety incidents.Healthcare management forum · 2024Article
- Barriers and Facilitators to Coping with Second Victim Experiences: Insights from Nurses and Nurse Managers.Journal of nursing management · 2024Article
- Cardiac rehabilitation patient perspectives during COVID-19 pandemic: quantitative and qualitative study.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on byEmotional safety2023
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEfforts to involve patients in patient safety continue to revolve around professionally derived notions of minimising clinical risk, yet evidence suggests that patients hold perspectives on patient safety that are distinct from clinicians and academics. This study aims to understand how hospital inpatients across three different specialties conceptualise patient safety and develop a conceptual model that reflects their perspectives.
methodsA qualitative semi-structured interview study was conducted with 24 inpatients across three clinical specialties (medicine for the elderly, elective surgery and maternity) at a large central London teaching hospital. An abbreviated form of constructivist grounded theory was employed to analyse interview transcripts. Constant comparative analysis and memo-writing using the clustering technique were used to develop a model of how patients conceptualise patient safety.
resultsWhile some patients described patient safety using terms consistent with clinical/academic definitions, patients predominantly conceptualised patient safety in the context of what made them 'feel safe'. Patients' feelings of safety arose from a range of care experiences involving specific actors: hospital staff, the patient, their friends/family/carers, and the healthcare organisation. Four types of experiences contributed to how patients conceptualise safety: actions observed by patients; actions received by patients; actions performed by patients themselves; and shared actions involving patients and other actors in their care.
conclusionsOur findings support the need for a patient safety paradigm that is meaningful to all stakeholders, incorporating what matters to patients to
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.