ArticleInternational journal of medical education2026
Developing and validating patient safety sessions in Japanese medical education: a modified Delphi study.
Article in International journal of medical education, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: This study aimed to (1) develop and validate educationally sound and feasible model session plans for patient safety learning in Japanese undergraduate medical education and (2) identify barriers to their implementation in educational settings. Methods: A convergent mixed-methods design was embedded within a modified Delphi study. Four session plans based on Merrill's First Principles of Instruction were evaluated by 45 patient safety specialists and faculty purposively sampled from Japanese national university hospitals. Participants assessed plans using a 14-item Context-Input-Process-Product checklist. Items were rated on a four-point scale; consensus was defined as a mean score ≥ 3.5 and a standard deviation < 1.0. Simultaneously, open-ended comments on implementation challenges were analyzed using directed content analysis based on Steinert's framework for educational barriers. Quantitative and qualitative data were integrated using a joint display to derive meta-inferences. Results: All four sessions met consensus criteria in the first round (n = 36; response rate = 80%). Topics covered human error, incident reporting, root cause analysis, and conflict management. Analysis identified 13 subthemes across five domains-teacher, student, knowledge, attitude, and system. Key barriers included limited faculty facilitation experience, insufficient linkage to safety practice, and institutional constraints such as lack of formal educational roles for safety specialists. Conclusions: The validated sessions demonstrated strong feasibility. However, content readiness alone does not guarantee successful adoption. Addressing identified barriers through targeted faculty development focusing on facilitation skills and organizational alignment is necessary to achieve sustainable implementation of patient safety education in undergraduate programs.
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.