ReviewFrontiers in public health2024
Framing diagnostic error: an epidemiological perspective.
Review in Frontiers in public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Al-Bahah Paradox: Divergent Patterns of Increased and Decreased Infectious Disease Incidence Relative to National Saudi Rates Over 12 Years of Surveillance.Saudi medical journal · 2026Article
- Understanding cognitive errors in clinical decision-making: a Q methodology approach.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Macrophage polarization in inflammatory regulation: molecular mechanisms, therapeutic targets, and translational challenges.Cellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS · 2026Review
- Differences in contributing factors to diagnostic errors between physicians and allied health professionals: a nationwide analysis in Japan.BMJ open quality · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Diagnostic errors burden the United States healthcare system. Depending on how they are defined, between 40,000 and 4 million cases occur annually. Despite this striking statistic, and the potential benefits epidemiological approaches offer in identifying risk factors for sub-optimal diagnoses, diagnostic error remains an underprioritized epidemiolocal research topic. Magnifying the challenge are the array of forms and definitions of diagnostic errors, and limited sources of data documenting their occurrence. In this narrative review, we outline a framework for improving epidemiological applications in understanding risk factors for diagnostic error. This includes explicitly defining diagnostic error, specifying the hypothesis and research questions, consideration of systemic including social and economic factors, as well as the time-dependency of diagnosis relative to disease progression. Additional considerations for future epidemiological research on diagnostic errors include establishing standardized research databases, as well as identifying potential important sources of study bias.
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.