ArticleAcademic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine2025
Epidemiology of diagnostic errors in pediatric emergency departments using electronic triggers.
Article in Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Feasibility of Pediatric Diagnostic Quality Measurement in All United States Hospitals.Annals of emergency medicine · 2026Article
- Identifying diagnostic errors in the emergency department using trigger-based strategies.BMJ open quality · 2025Observational
- Epidemiology of diagnostic errors in pediatric emergency departments using electronic triggers.Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine · 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
19 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesWe applied three electronic triggers to study frequency and contributory factors of missed opportunities for improving diagnosis (MOIDs) in pediatric emergency departments (EDs): return visits within 10 days resulting in admission (Trigger 1), care escalation within 24 h of ED presentation (Trigger 2), and death within 24 h of ED visit (Trigger 3).
methodsWe created an electronic query and reporting template for the triggers and applied them to electronic health record systems of five pediatric EDs for visits from 2019. Clinician reviewers manually screened identified charts and initially categorized them as "unlikely for MOIDs" or "unable to rule out MOIDs" without a detailed chart review. For the latter category, reviewers performed a detailed chart review using the Revised Safer Dx Instrument to determine the presence of a MOID.
resultsA total of 2937 ED records met trigger criteria (Trigger 1 1996 [68%], Trigger 2 829 [28%], Trigger 3 112 [4%]), of which 2786 (95%) were categorized as unlikely for MOIDs. The Revised Safer Dx Instrument was applied to 151 (5%) records and 76 (50%) had MOIDs. The overall frequency of MOIDs was 2.6% for the entire cohort, 3.0% for Trigger 1, 1.9% for Trigger 2, and 0% for Trigger 3. Brain lesions, infections, or hemorrhage; pneumonias and lung abscess; and appendicitis were the top three missed diagnoses. The majority (54%) of MOIDs cases resulted in patient harm. Contributory factors were related to patient-provider (52.6%), followed by patient factors (21.1%), system factors (13.2%), and provider factors (10.5%).
conclusionsUsing electronic triggers with selective record review is an effective process to screen for harmful diagnostic errors in EDs: detailed review of 5% of charts revealed MOIDs in half, of which half were harmful to the patient. With further refining, triggers can be used as effective patient safety tools to monitor diagnostic quality.
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.