SynthesisBMJ open quality2026
Evidence on the links between patient experience and safety: a systematic review.
Synthesis in BMJ open quality, 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
backgroundPatient experience and safety are central to healthcare quality, yet their relationship remains underexplored. While earlier evidence suggests a positive association, policy and practice are continually developing around the world. This review systematically examines the literature to better understand how patient experience and safety are linked.
methodsSearches were conducted via PubMed (2000-2023) using predefined terms on patient experience and safety. Articles were uploaded to Rayyan, duplicates removed and titles and abstracts screened for relevance. Full articles were reviewed and 30 eligible studies were included. A narrative synthesis was performed, with quality and evidence strength assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) framework.
resultsEvidence regarding the relationship between patient experience and safety was heterogeneous. Seven studies demonstrated consistent positive associations, 6 reported no association and 17 yielded mixed findings across different safety metrics. Among these 17 studies, 7 tended to support a positive association, 5 suggested no association and 5 reported results that varied according to the analytical approach. DISCUSSION: This review found mixed evidence on the relationship between patient experience and safety, and causality remains unknown. While some research identified clear associations, others showed considerable variation, often influenced by the specific measures used. Studies focused on secondary care, leaving gaps in primary and mental health settings. Notably, no research examined links between safety and the Picker Principles of 'fast access to healthcare advice' or 'family and carer involvement'-domains considered vital to safety.The review suggests that future research should explore domain-specific links and include experimental designs to strengthen causal understanding of the granular elements of safety and experience. Further investigation across care settings and population subgroups would help to fully understand how patient experience influences safety and vice versa.Overall, this review provides evidence that patient experience and safety are related but distinct concepts that should be addressed together in quality improvement efforts.
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.