ReviewThe western journal of emergency medicine2022
Charting Practices to Protect Against Malpractice: Case Reviews and Learning Points.
Review in The western journal of emergency medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Resuscitative thoracotomy in traumatic cardiac arrest : Multisociety consensus recommendations for settings with a low prevalence of penetrating injuries.Wiener klinische Wochenschrift · 2026Pooled it
- Application of digital simulations for clinical assessment and documentation of temporomandibular disorders: a retrospective study.Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology and oral radiology · 2026Article
- Analysis of Closed Claims in Cardiovascular Medicine: Importance of Nonclinical Factors.JACC. Advances · 2026Article
- Effect of a generative artificial intelligence digital scribe on pediatric provider documentation time, cognitive burden, and burnout.JAMIA open · 2025Article
- Medical and Legal Risks in Tibial Plateau Fractures.Clinical practice and cases in emergency medicine · 2025Article
- An innovative interprofessional mock trial experience: Collaboration between emergency medicine residency program and law school as a tool to demonstrate medical malpractice litigation.AEM education and training · 2025Article
- A Hospital Medical Record Quality Scoring Tool (MeReQ): Development, Validation, and Results of a Pilot Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionMedical documentation issues play a role in 10-20% of medical malpractice lawsuits. Inaccurate, incomplete, or generic records undermine a physician's defense and make a plaintiff's lawyer more likely to take on a case. Despite the frequency of documentation errors in malpractice suits, physicians receive very little education or feedback on their documentation. Our objective in this case series was to evaluate malpractice cases related to documentation to help improve physicians' documentation and minimize their liability risks.
methodsWe used Thomson Reuters Westlaw legal database to identify malpractice cases related to documentation. Common issues related to documentation and themes in the cases were identified and highlighted.
resultsWe classified cases into the following categories: incomplete documentation; inaccurate text; transcription errors; judgmental language; and alteration of documentation. By evaluating real cases, physicians can better understand common errors of other practitioners and avoid these in their own practice.
conclusionEmergency physicians can reduce their liability risks by relying less on forms and templates and making a habit of documenting discussions with the patients, recording others' involvement in patient care (chaperones, consultants, trainees, etc.), addressing others' notes (triage staff, nurses, residents, etc.), paying attention to accuracy of transcribed or dictated information, avoiding judgmental language, and refraining from altering patient charts.
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.