ArticleBMC nursing2025
Predictors of adverse event reporting intention among primary care nurses: a multi-center study in China.
Article in BMC nursing, 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.
- Patient safety culture across hospital tiers in China: a cross-sectional survey of healthcare professionals.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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe reporting of adverse events (AEs) is essential for improving patient safety. However, there is limited evidence regarding the reporting intentions of nurses in primary healthcare institutions, particularly in resource-constrained settings. This study aimed to investigate the predictors of AE reporting intention among nurses in China’s primary care sector.
methodsA multi-centre, cross-sectional survey was conducted from December 2023 to August 2024 with 607 nurses from 48 primary healthcare institutions in Chongqing, China. Validated instruments were used to assess AE reporting intention, reporting cognition, and perceived barriers to reporting. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics, non-parametric tests, Spearman correlation, and multiple linear regression.
resultsNurses demonstrated a high overall intention to report AEs (mean = 13.44 ± 3.32, on a scale of 0–15). However, nurses reported a significantly higher intention to use informal reporting channels (e.g., reporting to a supervisor) than formal, written mechanisms. The final multiple linear regression model (Adjusted R² = 0.333, p < 0.001) identified reporting cognition as the strongest positive predictor of reporting intention (β = 0.522, p < 0.001). A cumbersome reporting process was a significant negative predictor (β = -0.107, p = 0.005), whereas a punitive culture was not a statistically significant predictor in the final model.
conclusionIn the context of China’s primary healthcare system, nurses’ intention to report adverse events is driven more by their cognitive ability to identify an event and the simplicity of the reporting process than by the fear of punishment. To enhance patient safety, institutional strategies should prioritise improving nurses’ cognitive skills for event recognition and streamlining reporting systems to reduce procedural burdens.
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.