ReviewAtencion primaria2021
[Diagnostic error and overdiagnosis in Primary Care. Proposals for the improvement of clinical practice family medicine].
Review in Atencion primaria, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- [Indications for lumbar spine radiography in Primary Care: interpretation beyond the image].Atencion primaria · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Family doctors see a wide range of patients, with a wide range of complexity, in a short time and with few diagnostic resources. This situation makes primary care professionals more vulnerable to diagnostic errors. For this reason, an adequate clinical reasoning process is the most powerful tool family doctors have to safely guide the patient care process. Considering these errors as missed opportunities for a correct diagnosis, which may cause harm to the patient, leads us as professionals to review how to improve this process. The review includes, among other aspects, identifying cognitive biases, analysing the ways in which work is organised in primary care teams, and situations in the care context that may contribute to such errors. In this article we describe the most frequent diagnostic errors and their causal factors in primary care, the impact of cognitive process failures, situations of overdiagnosis and the diagnostic and therapeutic cascades associated with them. Finally, we propose a set of tools to improve decision-making in the diagnostic process in primary care.
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.