ArticleAEM education and training2025
Sustained Impact: Long-Term Application of Diagnostic Uncertainty Communication Training.
Article in AEM education and training, 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.
- Development and Validation of the Emergency Department Transitions Measure.Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine · 2026Article
- Sustained Impact: Long-Term Application of Diagnostic Uncertainty Communication Training.AEM education and training · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objectives: More than one-third of discharged emergency department (ED) patients leave without a clear diagnosis for their symptoms. In 2019-2020, we implemented a simulation-based mastery learning curriculum across two academic medical centers to train emergency medicine residents to discuss diagnostic uncertainty during ED discharge, guided by the Uncertainty Communication Checklist (UCC). We sought to assess if this cohort continues to apply skills learned and to obtain trainee insights into the most valuable checklist items. Methods: A survey was emailed to all 109 participants who completed the training in 2019-2020. Questions assessed how often participants currently encountered uncertainty and used the skills learned in the curriculum. Additionally, participants rated how important it was to keep each of the 21 UCC items in future uncertainty communication training (4-point Likert scale: very important/important/low importance/not important). Means and proportions are reported. Results: Sixty-five individuals responded (60%). Mean age was 33; and 30.8% were female. More than 90% encountered diagnostic uncertainty more than once per shift, and 74% applied skills learned in the training "often" or "all the time." Seven of the 21 UCC items received endorsement by more than 70% of respondents as "very important" to retain in future trainings. The item receiving the most endorsement as "very important" (90%) was to "Clearly state that either 'life-threatening' or 'dangerous' conditions have not been found." Items with lower rankings related to generally accepted communication best-practices (e.g., "make eye contact"). Conclusion: Four years following diagnostic uncertainty training completion, most respondents frequently employ skills learned from uncertainty communication training.
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.