↓ Skip to main content

Assessing safety climate in acute hospital settings: a systematic review of the adequacy of the psychometric properties of survey measurement tools

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
54 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
188 Mendeley
Title
Assessing safety climate in acute hospital settings: a systematic review of the adequacy of the psychometric properties of survey measurement tools
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, May 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12913-018-3167-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gheed Alsalem, Paul Bowie, Jillian Morrison

Abstract

The perceived importance of safety culture in improving patient safety and its impact on patient outcomes has led to a growing interest in the assessment of safety climate in healthcare organizations; however, the rigour with which safety climate tools were developed and psychometrically tested was shown to be variable. This paper aims to identify and review questionnaire studies designed to measure safety climate in acute hospital settings, in order to assess the adequacy of reported psychometric properties of identified tools. A systematic review of published empirical literature was undertaken to examine sample characteristics and instrument details including safety climate dimensions, origin and theoretical basis, and extent of psychometric evaluation (content validity, criterion validity, construct validity and internal reliability). Five questionnaire tools, designed for general evaluation of safety climate in acute hospital settings, were included. Detailed inspection revealed ambiguity around concepts of safety culture and climate, safety climate dimensions and the methodological rigour associated with the design of these measures. Standard reporting of the psychometric properties of developed questionnaires was variable, although evidence of an improving trend in the quality of the reported psychometric properties of studies was noted. Evidence of the theoretical underpinnings of climate tools was limited, while a lack of clarity in the relationship between safety culture and patient outcome measures still exists. Evidence of the adequacy of the psychometric development of safety climate questionnaire tools is still limited. Research is necessary to resolve the controversies in the definitions and dimensions of safety culture and climate in healthcare and identify related inconsistencies. More importance should be given to the appropriate validation of safety climate questionnaires before extending their usage in healthcare contexts different from those in which they were originally developed. Mixed methods research to understand why psychometric assessment and measurement reporting practices can be inadequate and lacking in a theoretical basis is also necessary.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 188 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 188 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 14%
Student > Master 22 12%
Lecturer 14 7%
Researcher 13 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 7%
Other 48 26%
Unknown 51 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 49 26%
Medicine and Dentistry 35 19%
Social Sciences 12 6%
Psychology 12 6%
Unspecified 5 3%
Other 17 9%
Unknown 58 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 June 2018.
All research outputs
#6,060,331
of 23,052,509 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#2,754
of 7,722 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#104,045
of 326,010 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#104
of 212 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,052,509 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,722 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 326,010 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 212 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.