ArticleJournal of patient safety and risk management2026
Programs for responding after patients are harmed by their healthcare: A Making Healthcare Safer IV rapid review.
Article in Journal of patient safety and risk management, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Patient harm from healthcare is prevalent, serious, and can be long lasting. How healthcare organizations respond has implications for patients, families, healthcare professionals, and organizations. We sought to synthesize the evidence on the effectiveness of communication and resolution programs (CRPs). Methods: Harm response programs that incorporated communication with patients and families, event review, quality improvement, and in a qualifying subset of events, an apology and an offer of compensation were included. We searched PubMed and the Cochrane Library for systematic reviews and primary studies published from 1 January 2010 to November 2025, supplemented by a review of gray literature. Results: We retrieved 2801 citations, of which nine primary studies and no systematic reviews were identified as eligible. The studies focused on medical malpractice experience and financial outcomes. The most robust CRPs reduced the rate of claims, and defense legal fees and expenses (strength of evidence: low). Time to resolution, rate of lawsuits, overall costs to healthcare organizations, and settlement amounts decreased or had no significant change. Evidence was lacking or limited for CRPs' effects on: other aspects of patient, family, or clinician outcomes or experience; patient safety; quality of care; communication and relationships between patients, families, and organizations; and interprofessional communication. Conclusions: CRP implementation is supported by evidence of positive or neutral effects on organizational liability and cost outcomes, but more research is needed to determine the effects on patient, family, and clinician-oriented outcomes.
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.