Safety Culture, Patient Safety, and Quality of Care Outcomes: A Literature Review
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This integrative literature review was conducted to examine the relationships between safety culture and patient safety and quality of care outcomes in hospital settings and to identify directions for future research. Using a search of six electronic databases, 17 studies that met the study criteria were selected for review. This review revealed semantic inconsistencies, infrequent use of a theory or theoretical framework, limited discussions of validity of instruments used, and significant methodological variations. Most notably, this review identified a large array of nonsignificant and inconsistent relationships between safety culture and patient safety and quality of care outcomes. To improve understanding of the relationships, investigators should consider using a theoretical framework and valid measures of the key concepts. Researchers should also give more attention to selecting appropriate sampling and data collection methods, units of analysis, levels of data measurement and aggregation, and statistical analyses.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it