ArticleJournal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open2022
Fast does not imply flawed: Analyzing emergency physician productivity and medical errors.
Article in Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Gender differences in patient assessment times for ambulatory emergency department patients.CJEM · 2026Observational
- Fast does not imply flawed: Analyzing emergency physician productivity and medical errors.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To determine whether emergency physician productivity is associated with the risk of medical errors. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed quality assurance (QA) and billing data over 3 years at 2 urban emergency departments. Faculty physicians working 400 hours or more at either site were included. We measured physician years of experience, age, gender, patients seen per hour (PPH), and relative value units billed per hour (RVU/h). From an established QA process, we obtained adjudicated medical errors to calculate rates of medical errors per 1000 patients seen as the outcome. We discretized numeric variables and used Kruskal-Wallis testing to examine relationships between independent variables and rates of medical errors. Results: We included data for 39 physicians at site A and 42 at site B. The median rate of errors per 1000 patients was 1.6 (interquartile range [IQR], 1.1-1.9) at site A and 3.3 (IQR, 2.4-3.9) at site B. At site A, RVU/h was associated with error rates ( Conclusions: Rates of medical errors were associated with 1 metric of physician productivity at each site, with higher error rates seen among physicians with slower productivity.
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.