Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39451490›Full record

ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2024

Instruments for Patient Safety Assessment: A Scoping Review.

Elisabete Nunes, Fernanda Sirtoli, Eliane Lima, Greyce Minarini, Filomena Gaspar, Pedro Lucas, Cândida Primo

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

7 authors.

Elisabete NunesNursing Research, Innovation, and Development Centre of Lisbon [CIDNUR], Escola Superior de Enfermagem de Lisboa, Avenida Professor Egas Moniz, 1600-190 Lisboa, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0001-7598-0670
Fernanda SirtoliCentro de Ciências da Saúde, Campus de Maruípe, Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo, Avenida Marechal Campos, 1.468, Vitória 29047-105, ES, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-3601-3394
Eliane LimaNursing Research, Innovation, and Development Centre of Lisbon [CIDNUR], Escola Superior de Enfermagem de Lisboa, Avenida Professor Egas Moniz, 1600-190 Lisboa, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0001-5128-3715
Greyce MinariniCentro de Ciências da Saúde, Campus de Maruípe, Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo, Avenida Marechal Campos, 1.468, Vitória 29047-105, ES, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0003-0935-9098
Filomena GasparNursing Research, Innovation, and Development Centre of Lisbon [CIDNUR], Escola Superior de Enfermagem de Lisboa, Avenida Professor Egas Moniz, 1600-190 Lisboa, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-8139-2717
Pedro LucasNursing Research, Innovation, and Development Centre of Lisbon [CIDNUR], Escola Superior de Enfermagem de Lisboa, Avenida Professor Egas Moniz, 1600-190 Lisboa, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-2560-7306
Cândida PrimoNursing Research, Innovation, and Development Centre of Lisbon [CIDNUR], Escola Superior de Enfermagem de Lisboa, Avenida Professor Egas Moniz, 1600-190 Lisboa, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0001-5141-2898

Funding

SMALL INSTRUMENTATION PROGRAMS15NR002023 · NINR · UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA · PI PHILLIPS, LINDA R · 1988 to 1988
–
Nursing Research, Innovation and Development Centre of Lisbon (CIDNUR), Escola Superior de Enfermagem de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal. 81/2023
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatient safety is an important component of healthcare service quality, and there are numerous instruments in the literature that measure patient safety. This scoping reviewaims to map the instruments/scales for assessing patient safety in healthcare services.

methodThis scoping review follows the JBI methodology. The protocol was registered on the Open Science Framework. Eligibility criteria were defined based on studies that include instruments or scales for assessing patient safety in healthcare services, in any language, and without temporal restrictions. It adhered to all scoping review checklist items [PRISMA-ScR], with searches in the Embase, Lilacs, MedLine, and Scopus databases, as well as the repository of the Brazilian Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations. Two independent reviewers performed selection and data extraction in July 2023.

resultsOf the 4019 potential titles, 63 studies reported on a total of 47 instruments/scales and 71 dimensions for patient safety assessment. The most-described dimensions were teamwork, professional satisfaction, safety climate, communication, and working conditions.

conclusionThe diversity of instruments and dimensions for patient safety assessment characterizes the multidimensionality and scope of patient safety. However, it hinders benchmarking between institutions and healthcare units.

Indexed as

evaluation of research programs and toolshealthcare qualitynursing managementpatient safetyreviewsafety management

Identifiers

PMID39451490
PMCPMC11508098

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.