ArticleBMC health services research2026
A retrospective descriptive study on the early identification of near-miss events in nursing.
Article in BMC health services research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo analyze the status of near-miss nursing events reported in this tertiary hospital in 2024 and to explore early identification strategies for these events, with the aim of continuously optimizing patient safety management and providing data support for decision-making.
methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted using data extracted from the hospital information system on near-miss nursing events reported in 2024. The analysis included both nurse-related and patient-related data associated with these risk events. Descriptive and statistical analyses were performed using SPSS version 25.0.
resultsA total of 120 near-miss nursing events were reported in 2024. Male patients accounted for 52.50% and female patients for 47.50%. The highest proportion of patients involved were aged over 60 years (51.67%), while those aged 0–2 years accounted for the lowest proportion (4.17%). Inpatients comprised the majority of cases (90.83%). Most events were reported during day shifts (76.67%), and 34.17% occurred during vulnerable time periods. The majority of incidents occurred in inpatient wards (67.50%), with fall/bed-drop risks (25.83%) and unplanned extubation risks (21.67%) being the most common types. The events involved 42 departments, with the Department of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine reporting the highest proportion (8.33%). A total of 111 nurses were involved in the reported events, with 98.20% being female. Nurses aged 31–40 years accounted for the largest group (55.86%), and those with a bachelor’s degree made up 88.29% of the sample. In terms of professional title, nurse-in-charge represented the highest proportion (68.47%). Most events were reported by individual nurses (91.89%), while a small number reported two events (8.11%).
conclusionThis study analyzed 120 near-miss nursing events reported in 2024. The results showed that most events occurred in inpatient wards (67.50%), with fall/bed-exit (25.83%) and unplanned extubation (21.67%) being the most common types. Temporally, events were concentrated during day shifts (76.67%) and patient-vulnerable periods (34.17%). Patients aged over 60 accounted for the majority of cases, and the Department of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine reported the highest number of incidents. Based on these distribution patterns, it is recommended to enhance monitoring of key scenarios, time periods, and patient groups in nursing practice. Future efforts should focus on expanding multi-center data collection, adopting systematic monitoring tools, and conducting qualitative research to further optimize event reporting and safety management strategies.
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.