Observational studyBMC health services research2025
Characteristics and risk factors for medical malpractice among obstetric and gynecologic physicians in China.
Observational study in BMC health services research, 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundLimited information is available on malpractice claims against obstetricians and gynecologists in China. This study identifies risk factors associated with malpractice and explores the correlation between the hospital characteristics and medical errors in obstetrics and gynecology.
methodsThis observational study analyzed all obstetric and gynecologic malpractice claims submitted to the Chinese Medical Association (CMA) from 2016 to 2023. Data were extracted from the CMA appraisal reports, including hospital type (general or specialized), tier (primary, secondary, or tertiary), ownership (public or private), primary department involved (obstetrics or gynecology), and detailed case characteristics. Malpractice claims were categorized by the type of medical error. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted to assess associations between medical errors and personal, administrative, and professional factors.
resultsAmong the 3,719 cases evaluated by the CMA, 3,676 were confirmed as malpractice. Nonfatal disability occurred in 1,339 cases (36.4%), and death occurred in 735 cases (20.0%). Specialized hospitals had a lower risk of malpractice-related death compared with general hospitals (odds ratio [OR] = 0.785; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.637-0.967). Private hospitals showed a reduced risk of severe nonfatal disability compared to public hospitals (OR 0.572; 95% CI 0.361-0.907). Secondary and tertiary hospitals were associated with a higher risk of severe nonfatal disability (OR 1.698 and 1.835, respectively; 95% CI 1.084-2.658 and 1.121-3.004) but a lower risk of primary liability compared with primary hospitals (OR 0.783 and 0.527; 95% CI 0.635-0.965 and 0.419-0.664). Compared with gynecology departments, obstetric cases presented a higher risk of malpractice-related death (2.866; 2.347-3.501) but a lower risk of primary liability (0.643; 0.559-0.740). Compared with public hospitals, private hospitals had more credential-related errors but fewer issues with informed consent and documentation. Obstetric cases more often involved errors in procedural timing, monitoring, and evaluation, whereas gynecologic cases had a higher frequency of surgical process errors (all P < 0.001).
conclusionsThis study provides the first nationwide analysis of obstetric and gynecologic malpractice claims in China. Strengthening grassroots and private hospitals and refining the hierarchical medical system may improve patient safety and healthcare sustainability.
trial registrationNot available.
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.