ArticleEmergency medicine Australasia : EMA2025
Initial Clinical Impressions Are Absent in Around a Quarter of Adult Emergency Department Patient Consultations: Let's Get Back to Basics.
Article in Emergency medicine Australasia : EMA, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Thinking critically about AI documentation quality in primary care.BMJ quality & safety · 2026Article
- Initial Clinical Impressions Are Absent in Around a Quarter of Adult Emergency Department Patient Consultations: Let's Get Back to Basics.Emergency medicine Australasia : EMA · 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
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveDocumentation of clinical impressions in ED electronic medical records is essential for diagnostic decision-making and effective patient management. We sought to evaluate the completeness of clinical impression documentation in initial ED medical assessments to identify gaps and inform future multimodal research interventions.
methodsA structured retrospective medical record review of 500 randomly selected adult patients who presented to four Australian EDs between 1-31 August 2024 was conducted. The primary outcome was a documented clinical impression in the ED initial medical assessment. Secondary outcomes included analyses of relationships between predefined patient or clinical factors and the documentation of a clinical impression.
resultsDuring the study period, 16 431 adults attended one of four Monash Health EDs. After exclusions were applied, 432 patient records were randomly selected for analysis. Clinical impressions were absent in 23.4% of cases (95% CI 20%-28%, margin of error 3.9%). This was consistent across levels of clinician experience and triage categories, except for category 5 with higher rates of absent clinical impressions (67%; 95% CI 31%-91%). Differential diagnoses were documented in 39% of cases. High urgency patients had more clinical decision rules documented (4%; 95% CI 2%-7% vs. 14%; 95% CI 8%-23%). Inter-rater reliability for the primary outcome demonstrated strong agreement (κ = 0.91).
conclusionAlarmingly, almost one-quarter of adult ED patients lacked a documented clinical impression in their initial medical assessment, irrespective of clinician experience and most triage categories. This gap should be addressed quickly to improve diagnostic decision making and protect patient safety.
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.