ArticleBMJ open2026
Instruments for assessing medication errors among healthcare professionals: protocol for a COSMIN-based systematic review.
Article in BMJ 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionMedication errors (MEs) are a major threat to patient safety worldwide. Numerous instruments have been developed internationally to assess MEs and medication safety. However, the measurement properties and methodological quality of these instruments have not yet been systematically evaluated. A comprehensive appraisal of existing instruments may provide evidence-based guidance for selecting appropriate tools in clinical practice, nursing management and research. Therefore, this study aims to systematically review the measurement properties of instruments assessing MEs based on the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) methodology. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This protocol was developed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. A comprehensive search of 10 electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, CNKI, Wanfang Data, VIP and Google Scholar) will be conducted to identify studies reporting the development and evaluation of instruments assessing MEs. The search will be performed in October 2026, with the final version of the review expected to be completed in April 2027. Two reviewers will independently perform study selection, data extraction and methodological quality assessment. Disagreements will be resolved through discussion or consultation with a third reviewer. The measurement properties of the included instruments will be evaluated using the COSMIN methodology. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required because this study will include only published or publicly available data. The findings will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal and presented at relevant academic conferences. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD420261396640.
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.