ArticlePediatric quality & safety
Diagnostic Safety: Needs Assessment and Informed Curriculum at an Academic Children's Hospital.
Article in Pediatric quality & safety. 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.
- Two decades of diagnostic safety research: advances, challenges, and next steps.Diagnosis (Berlin, Germany) · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Diagnostic excellence is central to healthcare quality and safety. Prior literature identified a lack of psychological safety and time as barriers to diagnostic reasoning education. We performed a needs assessment to inform the development of diagnostic safety education. Methods: To evaluate existing educational programming and identify opportunities for content delivery, surveys were emailed to 155 interprofessional educational leaders and 627 clinicians at our hospital. Educational leaders and learners were invited to participate in focus groups to further explore beliefs, perceptions, and recommendations about diagnostic reasoning. The study team analyzed data using directed content analysis to identify themes. Results: Of the 57 education leaders who responded to our survey, only 2 (5%) reported having formal training on diagnostic reasoning in their respective departments. The learner survey had a response rate of 47% (293/627). Learners expressed discomfort discussing diagnostic uncertainty and preferred case-based discussions and bedside learning as avenues for learning about the topic. Focus groups, including 7 educators and 16 learners, identified the following as necessary precursors to effective teaching about diagnostic safety: (1) faculty development, (2) institutional culture change, and (3) improved reporting of missed diagnoses. Participants preferred mandatory sessions integrated into existing educational programs. Conclusions: Our needs assessment identified a broad interest in education regarding medical diagnosis and potential barriers to implementation. Respondents highlighted the need to develop communication skills regarding diagnostic errors and uncertainty across professions and care areas. Study findings informed a pilot diagnostic reasoning curriculum for faculty and trainees.
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.