ReviewJournal of family & community medicine
A review of the global feasibility of medical malpractice insurance: Legal frameworks, economic viability, implementation challenges, and impact on patient safety.
Review in Journal of family & community medicine. 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.
- The social justice dilemma of liability allocation in medical damage: a qualitative analysis based on case judgments.Frontiers in public health · 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Medical malpractice insurance (MMI) is a critical determinant of healthcare quality, health partitioners' behavior, and health system sustainability in many countries. Despite decades of global efforts to reform MMI, evidence of the structure, awareness, implementation, and the impact of its framework remains fragmented. The aim of this review was to synthesize the global literature to map current evidence on the MMI legal framework, its economic viability, barriers to its implementation, and the implications for healthcare delivery and patient safety. A narrative review, informed by a systematic search, was conducted according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses) 2020 guidelines. Fourteen studies published between 2004 and 2022 were identified from multiple countries, including the United States, Spain, Switzerland, Georgia, Nigeria, and Turkey. Eligible studies included published reviews, empirical studies, and modeling studies related to MMI and its framework. Data were extracted on study characteristics, legal contexts, economic viability assessment, implementation challenges, and patient safety implications. The included studies address a broad range of malpractice-related issues. The evidence revealed substantial variability in how countries regulate and implement MMI, with notable gaps in practitioner knowledge, legal coherence, and affordability. A lack of awareness of health practitioners, regulatory fragmentation, and economically regressive insurance models continue to shape health practitioners' behavior that could indirectly affect safety and access. The literature lacks robust empirical evaluations that quantify how specific liability reforms translate into improved patient-level outcomes. Future research can prioritize comparative analysis to evaluate policy reforms to create balanced protection for both health practitioners and patients.
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.