Observational studyJournal of general internal medicine2025
Evaluation of Measure Dx, a Resource to Accelerate Diagnostic Safety Learning and Improvement.
Observational study in Journal of general internal medicine, 2025. 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.
- Feasibility of Pediatric Diagnostic Quality Measurement in All United States Hospitals.Annals of emergency medicine · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSeveral strategies have been developed to detect diagnostic errors for organizational learning and improvement. However, few health care organizations (HCOs) have integrated these strategies into routine operations. To address this gap, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality released "Measure Dx: A Resource To Identify, Analyze, and Learn From Diagnostic Safety Events" in 2022.
objectiveWe conducted an evaluation of Measure Dx to measure feasibility of implementation and effects on short-term and intermediate outcomes related to diagnostic safety.
designProspective observational study.
participantsTeams from 11 HCOs, primarily academic medical centers.
interventionsParticipants were asked to use Measure Dx over approximately 6 months and attend monthly virtual learning collaborative sessions to share and discuss approaches to measuring diagnostic safety. MAIN MEASURES: Descriptive outcomes were gathered at the HCO level and included uptake of different case-finding strategies and the number of cases reviewed and confirmed to have diagnostic safety improvement opportunities. We collected information on organizational practices related to diagnostic safety at each HCO at baseline and at the conclusion of the project. KEY
resultsThe 11 HCOs completed all requirements for the evaluation. Each of the four diagnostic safety case finding strategies outlined in Measure Dx were used by at least three HCOs. Across the cohort, participants reviewed 703 cases using a standardized data collection instrument. Of those cases, 224 (31.8%) were identified as diagnostic safety events with improvement opportunities. Unexpectedly, self-ratings on the checklist assessment declined for several organizations.
conclusionsUse of Measure Dx can help accelerate implementation of systematic approaches to diagnostic error measurement and learning across a variety of HCOs, while potentially enabling HCOs to identify opportunities to improve diagnostic safety practices.
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.