Trial reportDiagnosis (Berlin, Germany)2025
The effect of a provisional diagnosis on intern diagnostic reasoning: a mixed methods study.
Trial report in Diagnosis (Berlin, Germany), 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.
- How to … Coach Problem Representation to Strengthen Diagnostic Reasoning in Trainees.The clinical teacher · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesCompetency in diagnostic reasoning is integral to medical training and patient safety. Situativity theory highlights the importance of contextual factors on learning and performance, such as being informed of a provisional diagnosis prior to a patient encounter. This study aims to determine how being informed of a provisional diagnosis affects an intern's approach to diagnostic reasoning.
methodsThis mixed methods study was conducted in a real-time workplace learning environment at a large teaching hospital. Interns were randomized to the Chief Complaint (CC) only or chief complaint with Provisional Diagnosis (PD) group. One blinded researcher assessed intern diagnostic reasoning using a validated tool. Mean group scores were compared using the two-sample t-test. The researcher was unblinded for think aloud interviews analyzed via thematic analysis.
resultsThere was no difference in performance between the CC and PD groups (mean ± SD): 47.8 ± 8.1 vs. 43.9 ± 10.9, p=0.24. Thematic analysis identified that interns aware of the provisional diagnosis 1) invested less effort in diagnostic reasoning, 2) formulated a differential through a narrowly focused frame, 3) accepted a provisional diagnosis as definitive, and 4) sought to confirm rather than refute the provisional diagnosis.
conclusionsOur discordant results highlight the complex interplay between a provisional diagnosis and diagnostic reasoning performance in early learners. Though an accurate provisional diagnosis may enhance diagnostic reasoning outcomes, our qualitative results suggest that it may pose certain risks to the diagnostic reasoning process. Metacognitive strategies may be a ripe field for exploration to optimize this complex interplay.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39743792What 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.