Evidence mapPaperPMID 40868619Full record

ReviewHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2025

From Blame to Learning: The Evolution of the London Protocol for Patient Safety.

Francesco De Micco, Gianmarco Di Palma, Vittoradolfo Tambone, Roberto Scendoni

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Francesco De MiccoResearch Unit of Bioethics and Humanities, Department of Medicine and Surgery, Università Campus Bio-Medico di Roma, 00128 Roma, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-8483-3787
Gianmarco Di PalmaResearch Unit of Bioethics and Humanities, Department of Medicine and Surgery, Università Campus Bio-Medico di Roma, 00128 Roma, Italy.ORCID 0009-0009-6638-4151
Vittoradolfo TamboneResearch Unit of Bioethics and Humanities, Department of Medicine and Surgery, Università Campus Bio-Medico di Roma, 00128 Roma, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-9231-9523
Roberto ScendoniDepartment of Law, Institute of Legal Medicine, University of Macerata, 62100 Macerata, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-1910-2405

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Over the past two decades, patient safety and clinical risk management have become strategic priorities for healthcare systems worldwide. In this context, the London Protocol has emerged as one of the most influential methodologies for investigating adverse events through a systemic, non-punitive lens. The 2024 edition, curated by Vincent, Adams, Bellandi, and colleagues, represents a significant evolution of the original 2004 framework. It integrates recent advancements in safety science, human factors, and digital health, while placing a stronger emphasis on resilience, proactive learning, and stakeholder engagement. This article critically examines the structure, key principles, and innovations of the London Protocol 2024, highlighting its departure from incident-centered analysis toward a broader understanding of both failures and successes. The protocol encourages fewer but more in-depth investigations, producing actionable and sustainable recommendations rather than generic reports. It also underscores the importance of involving patients and families as active partners in safety processes, recognizing their unique perspectives on communication, care pathways, and system failures. Beyond its strengths-holistic analysis, multidisciplinary collaboration, and cultural openness-the systemic approach presents challenges, including methodological complexity, resource requirements, and cultural resistance in blame-oriented environments. This paper discusses these limitations and explores how leadership, staff engagement, and digital technologies (including artificial intelligence) can help overcome them. Ultimately, the London Protocol 2024 emerges not only as a methodological tool but as a catalyst for cultural transformation, fostering healthcare systems that are safer, more resilient, and committed to continuous learning.

Indexed as

clinical risk managementpatient safetysystemic investigation protocol

Identifiers

PMID40868619
PMCPMC12385728

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.