IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v69y2009i12p1777-1779.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Social scientists and patient safety: Critics or contributors?

Author

Listed:
  • Vincent, Charles

Abstract

Patient safety has been high on the national and international agenda in healthcare for almost a decade. It is proving to be a tough problem; tough in cultural, technical, clinical, and psychological terms and because of its massive scale and heterogeneity. While many of the challenges and problems of patient safety are social and organisational, few social scientists are involved in patient safety. Clinicians and clinical researchers are for the most part open to other perspectives, but that they may not fully appreciate the potential contribution of the social sciences. Social scientists can, for instance, assist in drawing attention to the need to take an account of the social and cultural context of patient safety interventions, by drawing on narratives and stories to illuminate organisational processes and by encouraging greater use of ethnographic and observational research. However, if social scientists are to have a real impact they need to do more than simply offer critiques of patient safety and move to active engagement with clinicians and patient safety researchers.

Suggested Citation

  • Vincent, Charles, 2009. "Social scientists and patient safety: Critics or contributors?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 1777-1779, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:69:y:2009:i:12:p:1777-1779
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(09)00637-6
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Iedema, Rick, 2009. "New approaches to researching patient safety," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 1701-1704, December.
    2. Xyrichis, Andreas & Lowton, Karen & Rafferty, Anne Marie, 2017. "Accomplishing professional jurisdiction in intensive care: An ethnographic study of three units," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 181(C), pages 102-111.
    3. Nicolini, Davide & Waring, Justin & Mengis, Jeanne, 2011. "Policy and practice in the use of root cause analysis to investigate clinical adverse events: Mind the gap," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 73(2), pages 217-225, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:69:y:2009:i:12:p:1777-1779. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.