ArticleFrontiers in medicine2024
Developing methods to identify resilience and improve communication about diagnosis in pediatric primary care.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 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.
- Priorities for improving paediatric diagnosis: findings from a modified Delphi study.BMJ quality & safety · 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Communication underlies every stage of the diagnostic process. The Dialog Study aims to characterize the pediatric diagnostic journey, focusing on communication as a source of resilience, in order to ultimately develop and test the efficacy of a structured patient-centered communication intervention in improving outpatient diagnostic safety. In this manuscript, we will describe protocols, data collection instruments, methods, analytic approaches, and theoretical frameworks to be used in to characterize the patient journey in the Dialog Study. Our approach to characterization of the patient journey will attend to patient and structural factors, like race and racism, and language and language access, before developing interventions. Our mixed-methods approach is informed by the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) 3.0 framework (which describes the sociotechnical system underpinning diagnoses within the broader context of multiple interactions with different care settings over time) and the Safety II framework (which seeks to understand successful and unsuccessful adaptations to ongoing changes in demand and capacity within the healthcare system). We will assess the validity of different methods to detect diagnostic errors along the diagnostic journey. In doing so, we will emphasize the importance of viewing the diagnostic process as the product of communications situated in systems-of-work that are constantly adapting to everyday challenges.
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.