Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38624507›Full record

ReviewCurrent treatment options in pediatrics2020

Patient Safety in Ambulatory Pediatrics.

Kathleen Huth, Arda Hotz, Amy J Starmer

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current treatment options in pediatrics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

3 authors.

Kathleen HuthDepartment of Pediatrics, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA USA.
Arda HotzDepartment of Pediatrics, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA USA.
Amy J StarmerDepartment of Pediatrics, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose of Review: The majority of patient care occurs in the ambulatory setting, and pediatric patients are at high risk of medical error and harm. Prior studies have described various safety threats in ambulatory pediatrics, and little is known about effective strategies to minimize error. The purpose of this review is to identify best practices for optimizing safety in ambulatory pediatrics. Recent Findings: The majority of the patient safety literature in ambulatory pediatrics describes frequencies and types of medical errors. Study of effective interventions to reduce error, and particularly to reduce harm, have been limited. There is evidence that medical complexity and social context are important modifiers of risk. Telemedicine has emerged as a care delivery model with potential to ameliorate and exacerbate safety threats. Though there is variation across studies, developing a safety culture, partnerships with patients and families, and use of structured communication are strategies that support patient safety. Summary: There is no standardized taxonomy for errors in ambulatory pediatrics, but errors related to medications, vaccines, diagnosis, and care coordination and care transitions are commonly described. Evidence-based approaches to optimize safety include standardized prescribing and medication reconciliation practices, appropriate use of decision support tools in the electronic health record, and communication strategies like teach-back. Further high-quality intervention studies in pediatric ambulatory care that assess impact on patient harm and clinical outcomes should be prioritized.

Indexed as

Ambulatory careMedical errorsPatient safety

Identifiers

PMID38624507
PMCPMC7553853

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.