Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40812813›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2025

Use of health equity tools in patient safety incident analyses: a scoping review.

Phelopater Sedrak, Kara Ly, Gagandeep Saini, Michelle Hwang, Cynthia Welton, Amir Ginzburg, Linda Fan, Nazia Sharfuddin

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors.

Phelopater SedrakDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada phelopater.sedrak@mail.utoronto.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9450-1417
Kara LyTemerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Gagandeep SainiTemerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Michelle HwangTrillium Health Partners, Mississauga, Ontario, Canada.
Cynthia WeltonWaterloo Regional Health Network, Kitchener, Ontario, Canada.
Amir GinzburgDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Linda FanDepartment of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
Nazia SharfuddinDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe aim of this study is to investigate the use and effectiveness of equity tools in current practices of patient safety incident analyses via a scoping review of the literature.

designScoping review of the literature using the two main search term concepts "health equity" AND "safety review". The PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) checklist was used to report in this paper. DATA SOURCES: Databases including but not limited to MEDLINE, Embase and PubMed were searched from inception to 16 January 2023. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Studies that included an equity tool in patient safety reviews were included. There were no restrictions on language or setting for included studies. Review articles were excluded. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two independent reviewers used standardised methods to search and screen included articles. Data from included studies was extracted and compiled.

resultsFive studies out of 5026 screened studies were included in the final analysis, 4 were conducted in the USA and 1 in Norway. While all studies identified equity domains to guide their approach to the provision of more equitable care, only three proposed change ideas and one implemented their framework to evaluate the role of social determinants and bias in adverse events. Communication was the most common theme found across four of the five studies. Access to healthcare services and bias were included as equity domains in two of the five studies. Implicit bias training was one of the identified change ideas. Other change ideas included improving access and communication, for example, through increasing the use and availability of interpreter services. One of the studies piloted the implementation of their equity checklist and found adverse event causes rooted in equity in 50% of the cases.

conclusionsThis scoping review demonstrates that there is a gap in current patient safety incident analyses, specifically lacking the consideration of equity domains. The development of a comprehensive health equity tool is necessary to promote equitable and safe care.

Indexed as

Health EquityMedical ErrorsPatient SafetyHumansChange managementHealth EquityHealth & safety

Identifiers

PMID40812813
PMCPMC12352139

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.