ArticleHealth services insights2022
Contributors to Diagnostic Error or Delay in the Acute Care Setting: A Survey of Clinical Stakeholders.
Article in Health services insights, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Simulated Emergency Room Sign-outs: What They Tell Us About Diagnostic Accuracy and Opportunities for Improvement.Journal of patient safety · 2025Article
- A controlled trial examining large Language model conformity in psychiatric assessment using the Asch paradigm.BMC psychiatry · 2025Article
- Risk-benefit analysis of a multi-site radiographer comment model for emergency departments.Emergency medicine Australasia : EMA · 2025Article
- Exploring Stakeholder Perceptions about Using Artificial Intelligence for the Diagnosis of Rare and Atypical Infections.Applied clinical informatics · 2025Article
- Using Artificial Intelligence to Stratify Normal versus Abnormal Chest X-rays: External Validation of a Deep Learning Algorithm at East Kent Hospitals University NHS Foundation Trust.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Time to diagnostic certainty for saddle pulmonary embolism in hospitalized patients.Biomolecules & biomedicine · 2023Observational
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
Diagnostic error or delay (DEOD) is common in the acute care setting and results in poor patient outcomes. Many factors contribute to DEOD, but little is known about how contributors may differ across acute care areas and professional roles. As part of a sequential exploratory mixed methods research study, we surveyed acute care clinical stakeholders about the frequency with which different factors contribute to DEOD. Survey respondents could also propose solutions in open text fields. N = 220 clinical stakeholders completed the survey. Care Team Interactions, Systems and Process, Patient, Provider, and Cognitive factors were perceived to contribute to DEOD with similar frequency. Organization and Infrastructure factors were perceived to contribute to DEOD significantly less often. Responses did not vary across acute care setting. Physicians perceived Cognitive factors to contribute to DEOD more frequently compared to those in other roles. Commonly proposed solutions included: technological solutions, organization level fixes, ensuring staff know and are encouraged to work to the full scope of their role, and cultivating a culture of collaboration and respect. Multiple factors contribute to DEOD with similar frequency across acute care areas, suggesting the need for a multi-pronged approach that can be applied across acute care areas.
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.