ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2018
Assessing information sources to elucidate diagnostic process errors in radiologic imaging - a human factors framework.
Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Classifying diagnostic pitfalls in juxtapleural CT lesions: A root cause.European journal of radiology open · 2026Article
- Infection prevention and control in the medical imaging environment: a scoping review.Insights into imaging · 2023Article
- Integrity of clinical information in radiology reports documenting pulmonary nodules.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2021Article
- Adapting a System-Theoretic Hazard Analysis Method for the Analysis of an eHealth Interoperability Conformance Profile.AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science · 2020Article
- Human Factors and Sociotechnical Issues.Yearbook of medical informatics · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objective: To assess information sources that may elucidate errors related to radiologic diagnostic imaging, quantify the incidence of potential safety events from each source, and quantify the number of steps involved from diagnostic imaging chain and socio-technical factors. Materials and Methods: This retrospective, Institutional Review Board-approved study was conducted at the ambulatory healthcare facilities associated with a large academic hospital. Five information sources were evaluated: an electronic safety reporting system (ESRS), alert notification for critical result (ANCR) system, picture archive and communication system (PACS)-based quality assurance (QA) tool, imaging peer-review system, and an imaging computerized physician order entry (CPOE) and scheduling system. Data from these sources (January-December 2015 for ESRS, ANCR, QA tool, and the peer-review system; January-October 2016 for the imaging ordering system) were collected to quantify the incidence of potential safety events. Reviewers classified events by the step(s) in the diagnostic process they could elucidate, and their socio-technical factors contributors per the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) framework. Results: Potential safety events ranged from 0.5% to 62.1% of events collected from each source. Each of the information sources contributed to elucidating diagnostic process errors in various steps of the diagnostic imaging chain and contributing socio-technical factors, primarily Person, Tasks, and Tools and Technology. Discussion: Various information sources can differentially inform understanding diagnostic process errors related to radiologic diagnostic imaging. Conclusion: Information sources elucidate errors in various steps within the diagnostic imaging workflow and can provide insight into socio-technical factors that impact patient safety in the diagnostic process.
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.