ArticleBMJ open2024
Disclosure of medical errors to patients by medical professionals: a protocol for a qualitative systematic review.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAlthough the disclosure of medical errors is an integral component of medical ethics, it remains inconsistent in practice worldwide. Despite various explanations of why healthcare professionals reveal their mistakes to patients, comprehensive comparisons and evaluations of this topic remain lacking. The objective of this review is to evaluate the experience of medical error disclosure among medical professionals who have been involved in such errors. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This work will focus on studies involving medical professionals from various countries who work in hospital settings and have obtained an understanding of and firsthand experience with medical error disclosure. This review will include qualitative studies. Studies published in databases such as PubMed, Embase, EBSCO, OVID, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Data and Cochrane Library from 1 January 2000 to 30 April 2024 will be searched as part of this research. Additionally, OpenGrey will be searched manually to obtain supplementary information. The search will be conducted starting in May 2024 and will include both Chinese-language and English-language literature. The systematic review will follow the Joanna Briggs Institute's (JBI) methodology for systematic reviews of qualitative evidence and use the JBI System for the Unified Management, Assessment and Review of Information online program. Study authenticity will be investigated via the Qualitative Research Authenticity Evaluation Tool provided by the JBI Evidence-Based Health Care Centre, and data extraction will be performed via the Qualitative Assessment and Review Instrument data extraction tool. The results will be integrated via a pooled integration methodology and evaluated in terms of reliability via the ConQual qualitative systematic evaluation evidence grading tool. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required for the study because the review will be based on pre-existing data available in the literature. The results of this systematic review will be submitted to peer-reviewed journals and presented at relevant conferences. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42024494360.
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.