Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27006889›Full record

ArticleDiagnosis (Berlin, Germany)2014

Developing checklists to prevent diagnostic error in Emergency Room settings.

Mark L Graber, Asta V Sorensen, Jon Biswas, Varsha Modi, Andrew Wackett, Scott Johnson, Nancy Lenfestey, Ashley N D Meyer, Hardeep Singh

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Diagnosis (Berlin, Germany), 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Strategies to reduce diagnostic errors: a systematic review.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2019
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Validation of an electronic trigger to measure missed diagnosis of stroke in emergency departments.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2021
    Article
  15. SAFER diagnosis: a teaching system to help reduce diagnostic errors in primary care.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2020
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Mark L GraberSenior Fellow, RTI International, USA.
Asta V SorensenRTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
Jon BiswasEmergency Department, Michael E DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Varsha ModiHouston Veterans Affairs Center for Innovations in Quality, Effectiveness and Safety, USA.
Andrew WackettDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University Hospital, SUNY Stony Brook, NY, USA.
Scott JohnsonDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University Hospital, SUNY Stony Brook, NY, USA.
Nancy LenfesteyRTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
Ashley N D MeyerHouston Veterans Affairs Center for Innovations in Quality, Effectiveness and Safety, USA.
Hardeep SinghHouston Veterans Affairs Center for Innovations in Quality, Effectiveness and Safety, USA.

Funding

Reducing Missed And Delayed Diagnoses In Cancer: Lessons From AviationK23CA125585 · NCI · BAYLOR COLLEGE OF MEDICINE · PI SINGH, HARDEEP · 2007 to 2011
$709k
NCI NIH HHS K23 CA125585
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundChecklists have been shown to improve performance of complex, error-prone processes. To develop a checklist with potential to reduce the likelihood of diagnostic error for patients presenting to the Emergency Room (ER) with undiagnosed conditions.

methodsParticipants included 15 staff ER physicians working in two large academic centers. A rapid cycle design and evaluation process was used to develop a general checklist for high-risk situations vulnerable to diagnostic error. Physicians used the general checklists and a set of symptom-specific checklists for a period of 2 months. We conducted a mixed methods evaluation that included interviews regarding user perceptions and quantitative assessment of resource utilization before and after checklist use.

resultsA general checklist was developed iteratively by obtaining feedback from users and subject matter experts, and was trialed along with a set of specific checklists in the ER. Both the general and the symptom-specific checklists were judged to be helpful, with a slight preference for using symptom-specific lists. Checklist use commonly prompted consideration of additional diagnostic possibilities, changed the working diagnosis in approximately 10% of cases, and anecdotally was thought to be helpful in avoiding diagnostic errors. Checklist use was prompted by a variety of different factors, not just diagnostic uncertainty. None of the physicians used the checklists in collaboration with the patient, despite being encouraged to do so. Checklist use did not prompt large changes in test ordering or consultation.

conclusionsIn the ER setting, checklists for diagnosis are helpful in considering additional diagnostic possibilities, thus having potential to prevent diagnostic errors. Inconsistent usage and using the checklists privately, instead of with the patient, are factors that may detract from obtaining maximum benefit. Further research is needed to optimize checklists for use in the ER, determine how to increase usage, to evaluate the impact of checklist utilization on error rates and patient outcomes, to determine how checklist usage affects test ordering and consultation, and to compare checklists generally with other approaches to reduce diagnostic error.

Indexed as

checklistclinical reasoningdiagnosisdiagnostic erroremergency medicine

Identifiers

PMID27006889
PMCPMC4799784

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.