Trial reportThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2015
Early diagnostic suggestions improve accuracy of GPs: a randomised controlled trial using computer-simulated patients.
Trial report in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 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
50 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Identification of Risk Factors and Symptoms of COVID-19: Analysis of Biomedical Literature and Social Media Data.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Pooled it
- Decision support tools to improve cancer diagnostic decision making in primary care: a systematic review.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2019Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Reducing diagnostic errors in primary care. A systematic meta-review of computerized diagnostic decision support systems by the LINNEAUS collaboration on patient safety in primary care.The European journal of general practice · 2015Pooled it
- Large Language Model Influence on Diagnostic Reasoning: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2024Trial
- Evaluation of a Medical Interview-Assistance System Using Artificial Intelligence for Resident Physicians Interviewing Simulated Patients: A Crossover, Randomized, Controlled Trial.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Trial
- Should electronic differential diagnosis support be used early or late in the diagnostic process? A multicentre experimental study of Isabel.BMJ quality & safety · 2022Trial
- Differential diagnosis checklists reduce diagnostic error differentially: A randomised experiment.Medical education · 2021Trial
- Effects of a Differential Diagnosis List of Artificial Intelligence on Differential Diagnoses by Physicians: An Exploratory Analysis of Data from a Randomized Controlled Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Trial
- Impact of digitally acquired peer diagnostic input on diagnostic confidence in outpatient cases: A pragmatic randomized trial.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2021Trial
- Efficacy of Artificial-Intelligence-Driven Differential-Diagnosis List on the Diagnostic Accuracy of Physicians: An Open-Label Randomized Controlled Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Trial
- Is C-reactive protein the answer to antibiotics over-prescribing in primary care? A behavioural experiment in two European countries.JAC-antimicrobial resistance · 2026Article
- The effect of medical explanations from large language models on diagnostic accuracy in radiology.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Taking a closer look: Can an app improve diagnostic accuracy in urgent care? Cluster-randomized interventional trial DASI.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- AI in the Hot Seat: Head-to-Head Comparison of Large Language Models and Cardiologists in Emergency Scenarios.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Safety of a large language model-based clinical decision support system in African primary healthcare.Nature health · 2026Article
- Preventing diagnostic errors in critical care using millimeter-wave technology: A transformative approach to patient safety.World journal of critical care medicine · 2025Article
- Cracking the code: a head-to-head comparison of expert clinicians and artificial intelligence in diagnosing rare diseases.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2025Article
- Article
- Human-AI collectives most accurately diagnose clinical vignettes.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDesigners of computerised diagnostic support systems (CDSSs) expect physicians to notice when they need advice and enter into the CDSS all information that they have gathered about the patient. The poor use of CDSSs and the tendency not to follow advice once a leading diagnosis emerges would question this expectation.
aimTo determine whether providing GPs with diagnoses to consider before they start testing hypotheses improves accuracy. DESIGN AND
settingMixed factorial design, where 297 GPs diagnosed nine patient cases, differing in difficulty, in one of three experimental conditions: control, early support, or late support.
methodData were collected over the internet. After reading some initial information about the patient and the reason for encounter, GPs requested further information for diagnosis and management. Those receiving early support were shown a list of possible diagnoses before gathering further information. In late support, GPs first gave a diagnosis and were then shown which other diagnoses they could still not discount.
resultsEarly support significantly improved diagnostic accuracy over control (odds ratio [OR] 1.31; 95% confidence interval [95%CI] = 1.03 to 1.66, P = 0.027), while late support did not (OR 1.10; 95% CI = 0.88 to 1.37). An absolute improvement of 6% with early support was obtained. There was no significant interaction with case difficulty and no effect of GP experience on accuracy. No differences in information search were detected between experimental conditions.
conclusionReminding GPs of diagnoses to consider before they start testing hypotheses can improve diagnostic accuracy irrespective of case difficulty, without lengthening information search.
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.