ArticleBMJ quality & safety2015
Advancing the science of measurement of diagnostic errors in healthcare: the Safer Dx framework.
Article in BMJ quality & safety, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 83 papers.
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
83 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sepsis Diagnostic Excellence: Development and Validation of a Theoretical Framework for Conceptualizing Accurate, Timely Sepsis Diagnosis.Critical care explorations · 2026Observational
- Diagnostic Failure in Invasive Fungal Infections: Causes, Clinical Consequences, and Mitigation Strategies.Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Metrology in Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis (BIA): From Measurement Science to Clinical and Research Applications.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Wrong-side imaging orders: automated detection using electronic health record data - a retrospective cohort study.BMJ open quality · 2026Article
- Screening for Missed Opportunities for Diagnosis in the ED Using eTriggers and Large Language Models.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Feasibility of Pediatric Diagnostic Quality Measurement in All United States Hospitals.Annals of emergency medicine · 2026Article
- A digital quality measure for emergency presentation of pancreatic cancer.British journal of cancer · 2026Article
- AI Triage in Primary Care: Building Safer and More Equitable Real-World Evidence.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Perspectives on innovation of the diagnostic process in general practice: Q-methodological study.BMC primary care · 2026Article
- Missed opportunities for earlier cancer diagnosis within specific pathways to emergency presentation.Future oncology (London, England) · 2025Article
- Simulated Emergency Room Sign-outs: What They Tell Us About Diagnostic Accuracy and Opportunities for Improvement.Journal of patient safety · 2025Article
- Diagnostic safety and quality optimization in sepsis study protocol.Journal of hospital medicine · 2025Article
- The Incidence of Misdiagnosis in Patients with Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Interventions to improve timely cancer diagnosis: an integrative review.Diagnosis (Berlin, Germany) · 2025Review
- Harbingers of sepsis misdiagnosis among pediatric emergency department patients.Diagnosis (Berlin, Germany) · 2025Article
- Communication failures and racial disparities in inpatient maternity care: a qualitative content analysis of incident reports.BMJ open quality · 2025Article
- Let us talk about mistakes.Pediatric radiology · 2025Review
- Diagnostic inequalities relating to physical healthcare among people with mental health conditions: a systematic review.EClinicalMedicine · 2025Review
- Implementation of Electronic Triggers to Identify Diagnostic Errors in Emergency Departments.JAMA internal medicine · 2025Article
- Enhancing Diagnostic and Patient Safety in Healthcare Systems: Key Insights from the World Patient Safety Day 2024 Commemoration in Uganda.Drug, healthcare and patient safety · 2025Review
23 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Diagnostic errors are major contributors to harmful patient outcomes, yet they remain a relatively understudied and unmeasured area of patient safety. Although they are estimated to affect about 12 million Americans each year in ambulatory care settings alone, both the conceptual and pragmatic scientific foundation for their measurement is under-developed. Health care organizations do not have the tools and strategies to measure diagnostic safety and most have not integrated diagnostic error into their existing patient safety programs. Further progress toward reducing diagnostic errors will hinge on our ability to overcome measurement-related challenges. In order to lay a robust groundwork for measurement and monitoring techniques to ensure diagnostic safety, we recently developed a multifaceted framework to advance the science of measuring diagnostic errors (The Safer Dx framework). In this paper, we describe how the framework serves as a conceptual foundation for system-wide safety measurement, monitoring and improvement of diagnostic error. The framework accounts for the complex adaptive sociotechnical system in which diagnosis takes place (the structure), the distributed process dimensions in which diagnoses evolve beyond the doctor's visit (the process) and the outcomes of a correct and timely "safe diagnosis" as well as patient and health care outcomes (the outcomes). We posit that the Safer Dx framework can be used by a variety of stakeholders including researchers, clinicians, health care organizations and policymakers, to stimulate both retrospective and more proactive measurement of diagnostic errors. The feedback and learning that would result will help develop subsequent interventions that lead to safer diagnosis, improved value of health care delivery and improved patient outcomes.
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.