ReviewHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2025
From Blame to Learning: The Evolution of the London Protocol for Patient Safety.
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.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Rethinking learning from incidents in healthcare: a Safety-II model integrating work-as-imagined, work-as-done, and work-as-experienced.Frontiers in health services · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.