ReviewDiagnosis (Berlin, Germany)2025
Ten years on: how far have we come in patient engagement in diagnosis?
Review in Diagnosis (Berlin, Germany), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The 2015 National Academy of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine report, Improving Diagnosis in Medicine, is known for its inclusive approach to patients. This paper explores the evolution of research in patient engagement in diagnosis over the past decade, drawing from peer-reviewed literature, policy initiatives, and institutional programs. Major themes include expansion from practical patient aids to co-designed patient reporting systems and patient-reported measures; a focus on diagnostic equity across all populations and conditions; and the emergence of comprehensive multidisciplinary theories framing a "diagnostic ecosystem." Drivers of change include long-standing frameworks for patient engagement, advances in health information technology, open access to medical records, and regulatory initiatives designed to enhance patient autonomy and enable systematic capture of patient perspectives. Future research in this area should improve patient-reported measures and reporting systems, identify and address diagnostic disparities, and co-create pathways to fully embrace and value the emerging patient voice.
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.