Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42706994›Full record

ArticleInternational journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care2026

Using an evidence-informed co-design approach to develop a mechanism to measure experiences of the open disclosure process: an Irish case study.

Aoife De Brún, Eilish McAuliffe, Maria Boylan, Helen Thompson, Catherine Hand, Alexandria Collins, Geraldine Kilkelly, Noreen Kennedy, Clara Meehan, Lorraine Schwanberg and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Aoife De BrúnCentre for Interdisciplinary Research, Education, and Innovation in Health Systems at University College Dublin (UCD IRIS Centre), School of Nursing, Midwifery and Health Systems, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0003-0124-0893
Eilish McAuliffeCentre for Interdisciplinary Research, Education, and Innovation in Health Systems at University College Dublin (UCD IRIS Centre), School of Nursing, Midwifery and Health Systems, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Maria BoylanHealthcare Professional, Dublin, Ireland.
Helen ThompsonQuality and Safety Manager, CHO Dublin North City & County, Health Service Executive, Dublin, Ireland.
Catherine HandIncident Management, National Quality and Patient Safety, Health Service Executive, Dublin, Ireland.
Alexandria CollinsAdvocacy Team Lead, National Patient Advocacy Services, Dublin, Ireland.
Geraldine KilkellyQuality and Patient Safety Advisor, Galway Roscommon Mental Health Service, Health Service Executive, Galway, Ireland.
Noreen KennedyQuality and Patient Safety Manager, St John's Hospital, Limerick, Ireland.
Clara MeehanPatients for Patient Safety Ireland, Ireland.
Lorraine SchwanbergIncident Management, National Quality and Patient Safety, Health Service Executive, Dublin, Ireland.
Éidín Ní ShéRCSI Graduate School Healthcare Management, Royal College of Surgeons Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.
and the ­members of the co-design team

Funding

Health Service Executive National Quality and Patient Safety
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionOpen disclosure (OD) is an open discussion with a patient and/or family member about an incident(s) that resulted in harm to that patient while they were receiving healthcare. It is widely considered an ethical and moral imperative and is what patients and families want when harm occurs. However, there is a dearth of research on patient and family experiences of OD and limited measures available to measure the quality of current processes. This research aimed to address this gap by using an evidence-informed approach to working with experts by experience to co-design a mechanism to measure patient experience of OD.

methodsWe adopted a co-design approach, which involves partnering with stakeholders in the healthcare system to address a shared goal and working collaboratively to develop consensus about how best to address an identified challenge. A co-design team was established which included experts by experience (those with direct patient/family experience of OD; n = 5), patient advocates (n = 2), patient and service user engagement leads in the health system (n = 2), quality and patient safety managers/advisors (n = 3), members of the National Open Disclosure Team (n = 3) and academics/researchers (n = 3). A one-day in-person workshop was held using the World Café approach whereby a series of small group discussions on sub-topics helped develop consensus on how to measure experience.

resultsParticipants agreed that a brief survey, focusing on key aspects of the OD process would be the optimal way for patients and relevant others to provide feedback that could support learning and quality improvement. Participants acknowledged the use of open text comment boxes within the survey would be useful to allow respondents to elaborate on their experience further, if desired. Furthermore, the survey should provide the option for the respondent to indicate if they would like to speak to someone about their experience of OD in more detail. The co-design team agreed that everyone who has experience of OD, regardless of level of harm, should be eligible and invited to take part in providing feedback on their experiences. A draft survey was developed by the group and is presented in full.

conclusionsThis paper documents the co-design approach adopted on this sensitive topic and shares recommendations that emerged from the co-design process of how experiences of OD should be measured for the purposes of improvement. While the survey was deemed optimal by co-design group members, it is acknowledged that this could be challenging for some to complete. This draft survey, however, offers a valuable starting point to understanding if the process is working as intended for patients and families who experience harm.

Indexed as

DisclosureFamilyHumansIrelandco-designopen disclosurepatient experience

Identifiers

PMID42706994
PMCPMC13615654

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.