Making the case for a qualitative study of medical errors in primary care

Anton J. Kuzel, Steven H. Woolf, John D. Engel, Valerie J. Gilchrist, Richard M. Frankel, Thomas A. LaVeist, Charles Vincent

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

14 Scopus citations


In the interest of publicizing examples of funded qualitative health research, the authors share a proposal to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality in Washington, D.C., in which they sought to elicit patient stories of preventable problems in their primary health care that were associated with psychological or physical harms. These stones would allow for the construction of a tentative typology of errors and harms as experienced by patients and the contrasting of this with errors and harms reported by primary care physicians in the United States and other countries. The authors make explicit the anticipated concerns of reviewers more accustomed to quantitative research proposals and the arguments and strategies employed to address them.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)743-780
Number of pages38
JournalQualitative Health Research
Issue number6
StatePublished - 2003


  • Medical error
  • Patient harms
  • Patient perspectives
  • Qualitative methods

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • General Nursing
  • Health(social science)
  • General Health Professions


Dive into the research topics of 'Making the case for a qualitative study of medical errors in primary care'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this