ArticleBMC medical education2026
Exploring the use of observational tools for advancing patient safety learning among preregistration healthcare students: a scoping review using the 3P model of teaching and learning.
Article in BMC medical education, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPatient safety is a global health priority and a fundamental part of healthcare curricula worldwide. While teaching medical students on theoretical components is straightforward, students may fail to prioritise patient safety due to an incomplete understanding and experience of the pressures of front-line care. Using an observational tool for patient safety learning in real clinical environments appears to help students engage with the significance of safe practice. This review seeks to identify learning approaches that use observational safety tools in practice.
methodsThis scoping review follows the JBI Evidence Synthesis Template. We searched Medline, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, and The Cochrane Library for relevant papers published from 2009 to June 2024. Papers were appraised for quality indicators and pedagogical theory. They were synthesised using Bigg’s 3P theoretical model into presage (teaching setup), process (teaching), and product (evaluation and assessment) factors.
resultsOf an initial 10,203 articles, only eight met the search criteria. The selected studies were conducted in North America (five) or Europe (three). The studies involved medical and nursing students in mid-to-late training and were for uni or interprofessional learning. Most studies involved a few representative students (range 11–368). They were conducted in acute clinical settings, including wards and theatres. All studies claimed the use of a safety tool to advance students’ learning, and many involved monitoring real-time clinical practice. The authors reported that the students gained new knowledge, identified errors, valued learning in a team and felt better prepared to speak up for errors. The studies failed to fully describe presage factors for setup challenges and issues. They lacked rigour and adequate theoretical explanations about how learning took place (process). As the work was mainly descriptive and atheoretical, assessment outputs were lacking, but evaluations were described.
conclusionsObservational patient safety learning tools used in practice benefit students’ understanding of patient safety, advancing their preparation for practice and remain under-studied and under-developed. The studies were often in their pilot development stages and hence involved few students. Further research on the use of patient safety education tools, used in practice, is urgently required to help educators with teaching design, delivery and assessment.
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.