ArticleFrontiers in health services2025
The power and pain of words: how language matters in responding to patients after harm.
Article in Frontiers in health services, 2025. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A change is slowly occurring in the ways healthcare responds to patients after they experience harm. The imperative to be transparent with patients and families has been accepted as a key element of high quality, safe and patient-centered healthcare. The language used to describe the experience of the people impacted by harm events is also evolving, recognizing that certain words can help or hinder the experience of patients affected by harm. The language describing these efforts is shifting from legal and institutional terminology to more inclusive terms recognizing broader groups impacted by harm. We describe the evolution of language regarding harm response and make recommendations for the future of the field. While our observations on language are specific to the terminology used in the United States, the concept of moving to more patient-centered language is universal. Other countries should make similar reviews to use more patient-centered language when discussing patient harm.
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.