Trial reportJAMA network open2023
Testing a Novel Deliberate Practice Intervention to Improve Diagnostic Reasoning in Trauma Triage: A Pilot Randomized Clinical Trial.
Trial report in JAMA network open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05168579 (Developing a Deliberate Practice Intervention to Recalibrate Physician Heuristics in Trauma Triage), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 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.
Developing a Deliberate Practice Intervention to Recalibrate Physician Heuristics in Trauma Triage
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Inside the Black Box of Deliberate Practice: How do Coaches Coach to Improve Trauma Triage.The Journal of surgical research · 2024Trial
- Analysis of the effect of the pre-examination and triage system in patients with fever in the fever outpatient clinic.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies after cardiac arrest.Current opinion in critical care · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: Diagnostic errors made during triage at nontrauma centers contribute to preventable morbidity and mortality after injury. Objective: To test the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary effect of a novel deliberate practice intervention to improve diagnostic reasoning in trauma triage. Design, Setting, and Participants: This pilot randomized clinical trial was conducted online in a national convenience sample of 72 emergency physicians between January 1 and March 31, 2022, without follow-up. Interventions: Participants were randomly assigned to receive either usual care (ie, passive control) or a deliberate practice intervention, consisting of 3 weekly, 30-minute, video-conferenced sessions during which physicians played a customized, theory-based video game while being observed by content experts (coaches) who provided immediate, personalized feedback on diagnostic reasoning. Main Outcomes and Measures: Using the Proctor framework of outcomes for implementation research, the feasibility, fidelity, acceptability, adoption, and appropriateness of the intervention was assessed by reviewing videos of the coaching sessions and conducting debriefing interviews with participants. A validated online simulation was used to assess the intervention's effect on behavior, and triage among control and intervention physicians was compared using mixed-effects logistic regression. Implementation outcomes were analyzed using an intention-to-treat approach, but participants who did not use the simulation were excluded from the efficacy analysis. Results: The study enrolled 72 physicians (mean [SD] age, 43.3 [9.4] years; 44 men [61%]) but limited registration of physicians in the intervention group to 30 because of the availability of the coaches. Physicians worked in 20 states; 62 (86%) were board certified in emergency medicine. The intervention was delivered with high fidelity, with 28 of 30 physicians (93%) completing 3 coaching sessions and with coaches delivering 95% of session components (642 of 674). A total of 21 of 36 physicians (58%) in the control group participated in outcome assessment; 28 of 30 physicians (93%) in the intervention group participated in semistructured interviews, and 26 of 30 physicians (87%) in the intervention group participated in outcome assessment. Most physicians in the intervention group (93% [26 of 28]) described the sessions as entertaining and valuable; most (88% [22 of 25]) affirmed the intention to adopt the principles discussed. Suggestions for refinement included providing more time with the coach and addressing contextual barriers to triage. During the simulation, the triage decisions of physicians in the intervention group were more likely to adhere to clinical practice guidelines than those in the control group (odds ratio; 13.8, 95% CI, 2.8-69.6; P = .001). Conclusions and Relevance: In this pilot randomized clinical trial, coaching was feasible and acceptable and had a large effect on simulated trauma triage decisions, setting the stage for a phase 3 trial. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05168579.
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.