ArticlePloS one2025
Repercussions faced by health professionals who have experienced the phenomenon of the second victims due to incidents related to patient safety: A scoping review protocol.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Repercussions of the second victim phenomenon on health care workers: Scoping review.PloS one · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPatient safety is a relevant, timely and globally significant topic. In hospital settings, despite ongoing discussions and advances in patient safety, adverse events continue to occur, impacting not only patients but also healthcare professionals. Health professionals involved in adverse events are considered second victims. This justifies the growing and pertinent interest in the phenomenon of second victim, as this experience affects the competencies and skills of health professionals while influencing their personal livesand general health.
objectiveTo map and characterize the repercussions experienced by health professionals who have experienced the phenomenon of second victims due to incidents or adverse events related to patient safety in health services.
methodWe will conduct a scoping review following the Joanna Briggs Institute's methodology for scoping reviews, in alignment with the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) extension. The databases to be searched include PUBMED, SCOPUS, CINAHL, Web of Science (WOS) and LILACS, while the gray literature will be retrieved from the Brazilian Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations (BDTD) and PROQUEST. The identified studies will be compiled and uploaded to EndNote (version X9.3.3), where duplicates will be removed. Two independent reviewers will import the studies into the Rayyan QCR® for organization and selection, with disagreements resolved by a third party. The selection of studies will be based on the population, the concept investigated and the context. The data will be extracted through a pre-established form.
resultsThe findings will be analyzed in a descriptive and narrative way, aligning the data with the objective of the study and the research question. The data will are presented in tables, diagrams, and graphs containing information from the extraction tool.
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.