ArticleInternal medicine (Tokyo, Japan)2021
Malpractice Claims of Internal Medicine Involving Diagnostic and System Errors in Japan.
Article in Internal medicine (Tokyo, Japan), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Improving decision accuracy using a clinical decision support system for medical students during history-taking: a randomized clinical trial.BMC medical education · 2023Trial
- Atypical Presentations at Risk for Diagnostic Errors in Internal Medicine: A Scoping Review.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Article
- Construction and validation of nomogram model for high-risk early warning of medical complaints based on occupational characteristics and workload of medical staff.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Evaluation of Malpractice Fear, Burnout, and Spiritual Well-Being among Physicians in Turkey: A Descriptive Study.Journal of religion and health · 2025Article
- Article
- Patterns of errors and weaknesses in the diagnostic process: retrospective analysis of malpractice claims and adverse events from two national databases.BMJ open quality · 2025Article
- Definitions and Measurements for Atypical Presentations at Risk for Diagnostic Errors in Internal Medicine: Protocol for a Scoping Review.JMIR research protocols · 2024Article
- Japanese Internists' Most Memorable Diagnostic Error Cases: A Self-reflection Survey.Internal medicine (Tokyo, Japan) · 2024Article
- The impact and prevention of systemic and diagnostic errors in surgical malpractice claims in Japan: a retrospective cohort study.Surgery today · 2023Article
- Characteristics and trends of medical malpractice claims in Japan between 2006 and 2021.PloS one · 2023Article
- A letter from a patient: Awareness regarding medical errors and patient engagement.Journal of general and family medicine · 2023Article
- Impact of System and Diagnostic Errors on Medical Litigation Outcomes: Machine Learning-Based Prediction Models.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Incidence of Diagnostic Errors Among Unexpectedly Hospitalized Patients Using an Automated Medical History-Taking System With a Differential Diagnosis Generator: Retrospective Observational Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2022Article
- Future Research in General Medicine Has Diverse Topics and is Highly Promising: Opinions Based on a Questionnaire Survey.International journal of general medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives Medical litigation resulting from diagnostic errors leads to lawsuits that are time-consuming, expensive, and psychologically burdensome. Few studies have focused on internists, who are more likely to make diagnostic errors than others, with assessments of litigation in terms of system and diagnostic errors. This study explored factors contributing to internists losing lawsuits and examined whether system or diagnostic errors were more important on the outcome. Methods Data regarding 419 lawsuits against internists closed between 1961 and 2017 were extracted from a public Japanese database. Factors affecting litigation outcomes were identified by comparative analysis focusing on system and diagnostic errors, environmental factors, and differences in initial diagnoses. Results Overall, 419 malpractice claims against internists were analyzed. The rate of lawsuits being decided against internists was high (50.1%). The primary cause of litigation was diagnostic errors (213, 54%), followed by system errors (188, 45%). The foremost initial diagnostic error was "no abnormality" (17.2%) followed by ischemic heart disease (9.6%) and malignant neoplasm (8.1%). Following cause-adjustment for loss, system errors were 21.37 times more likely to lead to a loss. Losses were 6.26 times higher for diagnostic error cases, 2.49 times higher for errors occurring at night, and 3.44 times higher when "malignant neoplasm" was the first diagnosis. Conclusions This study found that system errors strongly contributed to internists' losses. Diagnostic errors, night shifts, and initial diagnoses of malignant neoplasms also significantly affected trial outcomes. Administrators must focus on both system errors and diagnostic errors to enhance the safety of patients and reduce internists' risk exposure.
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.