MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407173461 · doi:10.62754/joe.v3i8.6260

Nurses' Opinions Regarding Comments from a Patient Safety Culture Evaluation

2024· article· en· W4407173461 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Ecohumanism · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPatient Safety and Medication Errors
Canadian institutionsInnovation Cluster (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPatient safetySafety culturePsychologyMedicineNursingMedical educationPolitical scienceManagementHealth careLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Ensuring a strong patient safety culture is essential for the delivery of high-quality healthcare. In low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), inadequate and unsafe medical care is responsible for nearly 60% of fatalities, many of which are preventable. A positive patient safety culture fosters trust, openness, and performance improvement. Understanding healthcare workers' perceptions of safety practices is a crucial step in enhancing patient safety culture. Methods: This study was conducted using a self-administered online survey among 1000 healthcare professionals in a major general hospital. The Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture (HSOPSC) was utilized, assessing 42 items across 12 dimensions of patient safety culture. 700 responses were analyzed. Descriptive statistics, positive response percentages, and multiple linear regression were used for data analysis. Results: Overall, 76.9% of respondents rated the patient safety grade as excellent or very good. The patient safety culture composite score was 74.2%, with strengths in areas like "Teamwork within units" (91.3%) and "Organizational learning" (88.4%). However, areas needing improvement included "Staffing" (49.4%) and "Non-punitive response to errors" (53.1%). A majority of respondents (67.1%) had not reported any safety events in the past year. Female healthcare workers and nurses reported lower perceptions of patient safety compared to male and physician respondents. Additionally, work area/unit influenced perceptions, with emergency and surgery departments having better safety perceptions. Conclusion: The study highlights a generally positive perception of patient safety culture in the hospital, though areas such as staffing and non-punitive responses to errors require improvement. Gender, position, and work area/unit were significant predictors of safety perceptions. These findings emphasize the need for targeted interventions to enhance patient safety culture, with a focus on improving staffing and fostering a non-punitive environment for reporting errors.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.379
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.098
GPT teacher head0.465
Teacher spread0.366 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it