Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40174977›Full record

ArticleBMJ quality & safety2025

Patient-reported harm from NHS treatment or care, or the lack of access to care: a cross-sectional survey of general population prevalence, impact and responses.

Helen Crocker, David A Cromwell, Shivali Modha, Alastair McIntosh Gray, Chris Graham, Lavanya Thana, Raymond Fitzpatrick, Charles Vincent, Helen Hogan, Michele Peters

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ quality & safety, 2025. 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

10 authors.

Helen CrockerNuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
David A CromwellHealth Services Research & Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Shivali ModhaPatient and Public Involvement and Experience Representative, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Alastair McIntosh GrayNuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0239-7278
Chris GrahamSurvey Development, Picker Institute Europe, Oxford, Oxfordshire, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6410-8171
Lavanya ThanaHealth Services Research & Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Raymond FitzpatrickNuffield College, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Charles VincentExperimental Psychology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0270-0222
Helen HoganHealth Services Research & Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0920-2093
Michele PetersNuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK michele.peters@dph.ox.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0076-5981

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe aim of this article is to provide an estimate of the proportion of the general public reporting healthcare-related harm in Great Britain, its location, impact, responses post-harm and desired reactions from healthcare providers.

designWe used a cross-sectional survey, using quota sampling.

settingThis research was conducted in Great Britain.

participantsThe survey had 10 064 participants (weighted analysis).

resultsIn our survey 9.7% participants reported harm caused by the National Health Service (NHS) in the last 3 years through treatment or care (6.2%) or the lack of access to care (3.5%). The main location where the harm first occurred was hospitals. A total of 37.6% of participants reported a moderate impact and 44.8% a severe impact of harm. The most common response to harm was to share their experience with others (67.1%). Almost 60% sought professional advice and support, with 11.6% contacting the Patient Advice and Liaison Service (PALS). Only 17% submitted a formal complaint, and 2.1% made a claim for financial compensation. People wanted treatment or care to redress the harm (44.4%) and an explanation (34.8%). Two-thirds of those making a complaint felt it was not handled well and approximately half were satisfied with PALS. Experiences and responses differed according to sex and age (eg, women reported more harm). People with long-term illness or disability, those in lower social grades, and people in other disadvantaged groups reported higher rates and more severe impact of harm.

conclusionsWe found that 9.7% of the British general population reported harm by the NHS, a higher rate than reported in two previous surveys. Our study used a broader and more inclusive definition of harm and was conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic, making comparison to previous surveys challenging. People responded to harm in different ways, such as sharing experiences with others and seeking professional advice and support. Mostly, people who were harmed wanted help to redress the harm or to gain access to the care needed. Low satisfaction with PALS and complaints services may reflect that these services do not always deliver the required support. There is a need to better understand the patient perspective following harm and for further consideration of what a person-centred approach to resolution and recovery might look like.

Indexed as

Health Services AccessibilityPatient HarmPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresState MedicineAdolescentAdultAgedCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited KingdomVulnerable PopulationsYoung AdultHealth policyHealth services researchPatient-centred carePatient Safety

Identifiers

PMID40174977
PMCPMC12772557

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.