ArticleJAMIA open2026
Sociotechnical safety risks in oncology: a framework-guided qualitative study.
Article in JAMIA open, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To analyze oncology nurses' accounts of technology-related safety events and the sociotechnical factors contributing to patient-, workforce-, and system-level harms. Materials and Methods: A framework-guided qualitative descriptive study was conducted with 28 oncology nurses from outpatient, chemotherapy, inpatient, and radiation settings at a large Canadian cancer center. Semistructured interviews and small focus groups elicited 98 technology-related safety events. Data were analyzed using a framework-guided qualitative descriptive approach informed by the WHO International Classification for Patient Safety, a sociotechnical model of health information technology, and a health data-related harm framework. Results: Reported adverse events most often involved clinical administration, documentation, and organizational processes. Contributing sociotechnical factors included workflow complexity, communication breakdowns, people-related challenges, and interface usability issues. Harms extended beyond patients and included system inefficiencies, delays in care, and adverse effects on workforce well-being such as frustration and moral distress. Discussion: Nurses described technology-related safety issues as recurring sociotechnical patterns arising from workflow, documentation, and organizational misalignments, rather than isolated technical failures. These patterns had interconnected impacts across patients, care delivery, and the healthcare workforce. Structured framework analysis of clinicians' narratives helped illuminate these relationships. Conclusion: Technology-related safety events in oncology reflect recurring sociotechnical misalignments, rather than isolated technical failures, and have consequences that affect patients, care processes, and the healthcare workforce.
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.