ReviewFrontiers in health services2026
Integration of patient safety into educational curricula and continuing professional training - comparison of patient safety competency models.
Review in Frontiers in health services, 2026. 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.
- How Do Nurses Navigate the Challenges of Risk Management? Results from a Cross-Sectional Survey in Southern Italy.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
Introduction: Patient safety is a fundamental component of high-quality healthcare, and integrating its principles into health professional education and continuing professional development is essential for ensuring safe care. This article describes and compares four international patient safety competency models from high-income regions (Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom, the Nordic countries), and the WHO Multi-professional Patient Safety Curriculum Guide and analyzes their similarities and differences. In this descriptive comparative review, the objective is to identify which competency domains each model emphasises, and which competencies are critical for advancing patient safety across healthcare systems. Methods: A thematic analysis of the patient safety competency models was conducted, focusing on their core competency domains and identifying the competencies most critical for advancing patient safety across healthcare systems in high-income regions. Findings: Common competency domains include safety culture, systems thinking, teamwork, communication, risk management, human factors, and continuous learning. However, there are notable differences: for example, the Nordic framework for knowledge and skills emphasizes technology and preparedness, Australia highlights ethics, and Canada focuses on resourcing. Discussion: The comparison of four patient safety competency models in high-income countries, and the WHO Multi-professional Patient Safety Curriculum Guide shows that they share a common set of core domains, providing a strong basis for aligning patient safety education in high-income countries. At the same time, country specific emphases highlight the need for contextual adaptation.
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.