ReviewBMJ quality & safety2013
The patient is in: patient involvement strategies for diagnostic error mitigation.
Review in BMJ quality & safety, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 59 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
59 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Enhancing Patient Understanding of Laboratory Test Results: Systematic Review of Presentation Formats and Their Impact on Perception, Decision, Action, and Memory.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Pooled it
- Understanding diagnostic conversations in clinical practice: A systematic review.Patient education and counseling · 2023Pooled it
- Prevalence, severity, and nature of preventable patient harm across medical care settings: systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2019Pooled it
- Patient involvement in diagnosing cancer in primary care: a systematic review of current interventions.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2018Pooled it
- Scoping review of patient and family engagement interventions in diagnosis: a paradox of too much, yet so little.BMJ quality & safety · 2026Article
- Improving Diagnosis: Evaluation of Diagnostic Experiences Classified as Problems, Mistakes, or Both by Patients and Care Partners From a Nationally Representative Survey.Medical care · 2026Article
- Surveying patients to assess timeliness of cancer diagnosis.Diagnosis (Berlin, Germany) · 2026Article
- Ten years on: how far have we come in patient engagement in diagnosis?Diagnosis (Berlin, Germany) · 2025Review
- Simulated Emergency Room Sign-outs: What They Tell Us About Diagnostic Accuracy and Opportunities for Improvement.Journal of patient safety · 2025Article
- The potential for patient-reported data and narratives to improve quality during emergency department boarding.Health affairs scholar · 2025Article
- Exploring sociodemographic disparities in diagnostic problems and mistakes in the quest for diagnostic equity: insights from a national survey of patient experiences.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Article
- Patient and family contributions to improve the diagnostic process through the OurDX electronic health record tool: a mixed method analysis.BMJ quality & safety · 2024Article
- Patient-informed exploration of the aftermath of a diagnostic problem or mistake based on results of a national survey.Frontiers in health services · 2024Article
- Achieving Diagnostic Excellence: Roadmaps to Develop and Use Patient-Reported Measures With an Equity Lens.International journal of health policy and management · 2024Article
- Patient Reasoning: Patients' and Care Partners' Perceptions of Diagnostic Accuracy in Emergency Care.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2024Article
- Review
- Co-Design with Patients for Improving Patient Safety: Strategies, Barriers and pitfalls.Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society ... Annual Meeting. Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. Annual meeting · 2023Article
- Collaborative Diagnostic Conversations Between Clinicians, Patients, and Their Families: A Way to Avoid Diagnostic Errors.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes · 2023Article
- Diagnostic Errors in Japanese Community Hospitals and Related Factors: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although healthcare quality and patient safety have longstanding international attention, the target of reducing diagnostic errors has only recently gained prominence, even though numerous patients, families and professional caregivers have suffered from diagnostic mishaps for a long time. Similarly, patients have always been involved in their own care to some extent, but only recently have patients sought more opportunities for engagement and participation in healthcare improvements. This paper brings these two promising trends together, analysing strategies for patient involvement in reducing diagnostic errors in an individual's own care, in improving the healthcare delivery system's diagnostic safety, and in contributing to research and policy development on diagnosis-related issues.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.