Objective: To identify the types of interventions that should be included in an organizational protocol for responding to serious adverse events involving nursing staff. Method: A descriptive exploratory study was conducted in the Autonomous Community of Madrid, Spain using a questionnaire. Results: 248 nurses have participated. The respondents prioritized the following interventions for inclusion in the protocol: legal advice (86.5% of participants) and counseling (82.4% of participants). Over two-thirds of the nurses (69.3%) showed that they would like to receive guidance on how to record adverse events on the patient's medical records, while 64.8% showed that they would like to receive advice on assurances and legal safeguards in relation to the health organization's medical error notification system and 54.5% endorsed refresher training. Compulsory temporary or permanent transfer of nursing staff involved in adverse events was one of the least popular interventions (3.3% of participants). Conclusion: The nurses prioritized counseling, legal advice, training in communication techniques, and refresher training to address the consequences of adverse events and discarded the possibility of compulsory temporary or permanent transfer.

A modo de introducción: la evaluación por pares G eneralmente la evaluación de los trabajos y proyectos de investigación se centran en un examen humano por medio de la revisión por pares (peer review) o por medio del sistema de arbitraje (Refereeing System). Estas modalidades de evaluación no son nuevas, pues ya en el siglo XVIII The Royal Society (1753) puso en escena la revisión por pares como mecanismo de evaluación a la hora de publicar en la revista The Philosophical Transaction of the Royal Society (Hernon y Schwartz, 2006).Tanto la revisión por pares como el sistema de arbitraje son un proceso que se inicia cuando un investigador somete un trabajo para su publicación en una revista científica o presenta un proyecto de investigación para ser subvencionado por una institución u organismo público o privado. Es entonces cuando se pone en funcionamiento uno u otro procedimiento con el objeto de conferir una calidad a la publicación o al proyecto evaluado. By examining scientific journals, this paper attempts an analysis of how scientific articles are evaluated. The quality of a piece of science is not solely a function of the number of references it boasts or a given journal's reputation. There are other qualitative aspects that confer quality to a text, not the least of which is content. By means of a qualitative analysis of texts, the author offers a socio-hermeneutic approach to the evaluation of a scientific writing, in order to posit guidelines for solving correction problems.

No abstract