ArticleFrontiers in health services2024
Cultivating the conditions for care: it's all about trust.
Article in Frontiers in health services, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Humanising Government Inquiry: A Realist Examination of a Restorative Approach to Surgical Mesh Harm in Aotearoa New Zealand.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
- Prevalence and Perspectives of Use of Dietary Supplements Among Adult Athletes Visiting Fitness Centers in Saudi Arabia.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This perspective article shares the viewpoints of two long-standing patient safety advocates who have participated first-hand in the evolution of patient engagement in healthcare quality and safety. Their involvement is motivated by a rejection of the common cruelty of institutional betrayal that compounds harm when patient safety fails. The advocates have sought to understand how it can be that fractured trust spreads so predictably after harm, just when it most needs strengthening. Instead, the abandonment of trust upends healthcare values and effectiveness at interpersonal, systemic and structural levels. They argue that authentic care (healthcare that is truly caring) transcends mere service delivery, thus embodying an inviolable commitment to mutual well-being, compassion and generosity. The advocates identify the influence of social determinants, such as culture, identity, and socioeconomic status, as critical to trust formation, where pathogenic vulnerability exacerbates existing inequalities and further impedes trust. The advocates call for a shift from transactional to relational, trust-based interactions that explore the potential for mobilizing restorative justice principles to repair harm and rebuild trust, enabling dialogue, mutual understanding and systemic improvement. Trust, they assert, is born in relationships, not transactions. The bureaucratic, legal and resource constraints that often impair meaningful interactions, also cause moral distress to healthcare providers and poor care quality for patients. They argue that central to the current healthcare crisis is the fundamental need for genuine connection and trust, framing this as both a practical necessity and a confirmation of humanity as intrinsic to healthcare. The advocates envision a future where patient engagement is integral to patient safety to prioritize epistemic justice, mutual respect and compassionate care, to restore healthcare as a cohesive, supportive and deeply human endeavor. They query what contributions a restorative approach could make to centre trust as necessary for cultivating the conditions for care in our healthcare system.
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.