Sorry, you need to enable JavaScript to visit this website.
Skip to main content
Commentary

Identifying adverse events: reflections on an imperfect gold standard after 20 years of patient safety research.

Shojania KG, Marang-van de Mheen PJ. Identifying adverse events: reflections on an imperfect gold standard after 20 years of patient safety research. BMJ Qual Saf. 2020;29(4). doi:10.1136/bmjqs-2019-009731.

Save
Print
March 25, 2020
Shojania KG, Marang-van de Mheen PJ. BMJ Qual Saf. 2020;29(4).
View more articles from the same authors.

This commentary discusses the two ‘gold standard’ research methods used to identify adverse events– retrospective record review and prospective surveillance using triggers. The authors note that these approaches have served to demonstrate the scope of the patient safety problem and to engage clinicians, managers, researchers and policy makers. However, looking forward, they advocate moving away from the imperfect gold standard of adverse event rates and embracing more specific measures of important safety problems.

Save
Print
Cite
Citation

Shojania KG, Marang-van de Mheen PJ. Identifying adverse events: reflections on an imperfect gold standard after 20 years of patient safety research. BMJ Qual Saf. 2020;29(4). doi:10.1136/bmjqs-2019-009731.

Related Resources From the Same Author(s)
Related Resources
See More About The Topic