ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2025
Perceptions and Experiences of Consumer Representatives on Patient Safety Investigation Teams: A Qualitative Analysis.
Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessing the quality of patient safety incident investigation reports.International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2026Article
- What Do Consumers Need Before, During and After a Patient Safety Incident Review? A Qualitative Study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
- Decades of failure to prevent harm to patients-where are we going wrong? A mixed methods study of the perspectives of health services staff across Australia and internationally.Frontiers in health services · 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThere is growing recognition of the importance of consumer representatives (CRs), consumers with lived experience, and advisors and volunteers in health systems to foster consumer-oriented care. As part of this changing perception, some health services are inviting CRs to be on patient safety investigation teams. However, little is known from empirical studies about these representatives' experiences and perceptions of their roles. This paper aims to contribute to understanding CR's involvement on investigation teams by examining the benefits, challenges, and other aspects of their participation.
methodsThe study takes a qualitative approach and draws on data from interviews with 11 CRs and 10 focus groups comprising health service staff from Victoria, Australia, and a data interpretation workshop with an advisory panel of six consumers across four Australian states. Thematic analysis was used for data analysis.
resultsWe found that CRs have positive experiences in patient safety investigation teams, and their involvement often leads to more patient-focused reviews and outcomes, and use of plain language. However, they also experienced some challenges, such as not being fully respected as equal members of the team, feeling uncomfortable speaking up, and practical issues such as payments and access to documents. The chair/facilitator plays a significant role in engaging with CRs meaningfully, and directly shapes the behaviours of the entire investigation team. Both CRs and chairs/facilitators require considerable institutional and systematic training and support within health services.
conclusionThe benefit of CRs on investigation teams outweighs the challenges across the individual, team/organisational and health systems levels. More resources and policies are needed to support CRs' sustainable inclusion, diversity and involvement in our current and future health services. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Eleven individuals with experience as CRs in patient safety investigation teams were interviewed. As indicated by the co-authors of this paper, six consumers from four states who are members of a research consumer advisory committee have been involved in co-designing the study methodology, interpreting the data, and writing this paper with the research team.
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.