Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Separating fact from opinion: a response to ‘The science of human factors: separating fact from fiction’
  1. Melissa Therese Baysari
  1. Correspondence to Dr Melissa Baysari, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, University of New South Wales, Department of Clinical Pharmacology & Toxicology Level 2 Xavier Building St Vincent's Hospital, Darlinghurst, NSW, 2010, Australia; m.baysari{at}

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

In their paper ‘The science of human factors: separating fact from fiction’, Russ et al present a description of the human factors (HF) discipline, and discuss several cases where the science of HF has been misapplied in healthcare.1

On examining some of the examples of misapplication they provide, it became apparent that in most cases the term ‘human factors’ was used to describe factors relating to human behaviour (eg, communication) rather than the scientific discipline.2 ,3 The research did not purport to adopt an HF methodology or stance. Are these really misconceptions about HF science?

Russ et al also provide examples …

View Full Text


  • Competing interests None.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

Linked Articles