ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2019
Test Result Management Practices of Canadian Internal Medicine Physicians and Trainees.
Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic review of evidence-based practices for clinical education and health care delivery in the clinical teaching unit.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2022Pooled it
- Novel approach to the codesign of a tailored intervention bundle: applying theory with pragmatism.BMJ open quality · 2026Article
- Variation in electronic test results management and its implications for patient safety: A multisite investigation.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2020Article
- Variation in the Management of Test Results after Hospital Discharge: A Pediatric Safety Concern.Pediatric quality & safetyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMissed test results are a cause of medical error. Few studies have explored test result management in the inpatient setting.
objectiveTo examine test result management practices of general internal medicine providers in the inpatient setting, examine satisfaction with practices, and quantify self-reported delays in result follow-up.
designCross-sectional survey.
participantsGeneral internal medicine attending physicians and trainees (residents and medical students) at three Canadian teaching hospitals. MAIN MEASURES: Methods used to track test results; satisfaction with these methods; personal encounters with results respondents "wish they had known about sooner." KEY
resultsWe received surveys from 33/51 attendings and 99/108 trainees (response rate 83%). Only 40.9% of respondents kept a record of all tests they order, and 50.0% had a system to ensure ordered tests were completed. Methods for tracking test results included typed team sign-out lists (40.7%), electronic health record (EHR) functionality (e.g., the electronic "inbox") (38.9%), and personal written or typed lists (14.8%). Almost all trainees (97.9%) and attendings (81.2%) reported encountering at least one test result they "wish they had known about sooner" in the past 2 months (p = 0.001). A higher percentage of attendings kept a record of tests pending at hospital discharge compared to trainees (75.0% vs. 35.7%, p < 0.001), used EHR functionality to track tests (71.4% vs. 27.5%, p = 0.004), and reported higher satisfaction with result management (42.4% vs. 12.1% satisfied or very satisfied, p < 0.001).
conclusionsCanadian physicians report an array of problems managing test results in the inpatient setting. In the context of prior studies from the outpatient setting, our study suggests a need to develop interventions to prevent missed results and avoid potential patient harms.
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.