ArticleHead and neck pathology2024
"So You Made a Mistake" - The Path Forward Through Surgical Pathology Errors by Extreme Ownership and a Focus on the Patient.
Article in Head and neck pathology, 2024. 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.
- Discrepancies with Final Diagnosis in Head and Neck Intraoperative Frozen Section.Head and neck pathology · 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Our goal for medicine is to make zero mistakes, yet the reality is that mistakes are an unfortunate part of medical practice. And when it comes to surgical pathology, it is a special case where the diagnostic "bottom line" is provided starkly and directly for all to see in the final diagnosis of the pathology report. When this diagnosis is wrong, particularly when it has serious adverse consequences for the patient, the resulting physical, mental, and emotional effects on patient, provider, pathologist, and health care system can be extremely serious. Head and neck surgical pathology, based on large second review-type studies, is a subspecialty area with average rates of major diagnostic error, but with potential for severely negative impacts on patients. Studies have shown between 1% and 7% major error rates for head and neck practice. How then, as the pathologist, can we react to and manage things when we have made a serious diagnostic mistake? Through personal experience over more than two decades, the hard-won answer is through extreme ownership and a focus on the needs of the patients, who, in the words of William J. Mayo, should have their "needs come first". The emotional impact on us as pathologists and on the clinicians we work with should also be acknowledged and managed. This article will serve as a thorough and open examination of these mistake scenarios and, focusing specifically on diagnostic errors, serve as a practical guide for what you can do, moving forward, to "make things right" to the best of your ability.
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.