ArticleBMC health services research2025
Portuguese cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the hospital survey on patient safety culture 2.0.
Article in BMC health services research, 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.
- Article
- Patient safety culture and climate in Estonian hospitals: a cross-sectional study on employees and background characteristics.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Assessment of patient safety culture among physicians in public hospitals in Djibouti: a cross-sectional study.BMC health services research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAs patient safety continues to be a global priority, it is crucial to emphasize the assessment and development of Patient Safety Culture [PSC] to advance healthcare quality and safety initiatives worldwide. This study focused on the assessment of PSC in Portuguese hospitals, specifically through the translation and cultural adaptation of the Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture 2.0 [HSOPSC 2.0] for the Portuguese context.
methodsThe study followed a two-phase design, encompassing the translation, cultural adaptation, and psychometric evaluation of HSOPSC 2.0. A total of 2,604 fully completed questionnaires were collected. The sample consisted of seven public hospitals from different regions of Portugal, ensuring broad representation within the Portuguese National Health System. Translation process include four stages: forward translation, back translation, expert panel review, and pre-testing. Instrument reliability was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha coefficients and Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA). Construct validity was evaluated through Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), while convergent and discriminant validity were examined using Average Variance Extracted (AVE) and Pearson’s correlation coefficients, respectively.
resultsThe Portuguese translated version of the HSOPSC 2.0 [PT-HSOPSC 2.0] demonstrated good internal consistency, with Cronbach’s alpha values ranging from 0.63 to 0.88, and factor loadings above 0.80 indicating strong factor reliability. CFA results supported the adequacy of the model fit: χ²/df = 4.64, p < 0.01; RMSEA = 0.05; CFI = 0.93; GFI = 0.90; TLI = 0.91; PCFI = 0.78; PGFI = 0.71. The instrument demonstrated good convergent validity, with AVE values at or above 0.50. Strengths included “Teamwork” and “Management Support for Patient Safety”, whereas “Open Communication” and “Hospital Management” were identified as areas requiring improvement. Overall, the PT-HSOPSC 2.0 demonstrated robust psychometric properties, confirming its suitability for assessing PSC in Portuguese hospitals.
conclusionThis study contributes to enhancing PSC assessment in Portuguese healthcare settings, by providing a translated and validated version of the HSOPSC 2.0 adapted to the Portuguese context. Findings support that PT-HSOPSC 2.0 is a reliable and valid tool for evaluating PSC in Portuguese healthcare settings.
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.