ArticleBMC nursing2022
Near-miss organizational learning in nursing within a tertiary hospital: a mixed methods study.
Article in BMC nursing, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dynamic analysis of critical maternal complications in tertiary hospitals in Wuxi: A study based on four years of monitoring data.PloS one · 2026Article
- Nursing near miss: a concept analysis.BMC nursing · 2025Article
- Influencing factors of self-reported near-miss in clinical nursing information system tasks among nurses: a multicenter cross-sectional study.BMC nursing · 2025Article
- Systematic Risk Analysis and Mitigation Strategies for Near-Miss Events in Interventional Operating Room Nursing.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNear-miss organizational learning is important for perspective and proactive risk management. Although nursing organizations are the largest component of the healthcare system and act as the final safety barrier, there is little research about the current status of near-miss organizational learning. Thus, we conducted this study to explore near-miss organizational learning in a Chinese nursing organization and offer suggestions for future improvement.
methodsThis was a mixed methods study with an explanatory sequence. It was conducted in a Chinese nursing organization of a tertiary hospital under the guidance of the 4I Framework of Organizational Learning. The quantitative study surveyed 600 nurses by simple random sampling. Then, we applied purposive sampling to recruit 16 nurses across managerial levels from low-, middle- and high-scored nursing units and conducted semi-structured interviews. Descriptive statistics, structured equation modelling and content analysis were applied in the data analysis. The Good Reporting of A Mixed Methods Study (GRAMMS) checklist was used to report this study.
resultsOnly 33% of participants correctly recognized near-misses, and 4% of participants always reported near-misses. The 4I Framework of Organizational Learning was verified in the surveyed nursing organization (χ
conclusionThe performance of near-miss organizational learning is unsatisfactory across all levels in surveyed nursing organization, especially with regard to group-level learning and poor learning absorption. Our research findings offer a scientific and comprehensive description of near-miss organizational learning and shed light on how to measure and improve near-miss organizational learning in the future.
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.