ArticleFrontiers in public health2026
A risk prediction model for medical conflict in emergency departments.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aims to identify and analyze patient-related risk factors that lead to medical conflict in emergency departments and to build a patient-related risk prediction model, which can serve as a tool for medical professionals to prevent medical conflict in emergency departments. Background: At present, the research on the countermeasures of medical conflict in emergency departments mainly focuses on post-event coping strategies and rarely addresses the early warning of conflict occurrence. Methods: Through a retrospective analysis of medical conflict events in the emergency pre-examination and rescue areas, 105 conflict cases and 525 non-conflict cases were collected. Univariate analysis, neural network analysis and support vector machine (SVM) were performed to analyze patient-related risk factors in medical conflict, thereby constructing a prediction model. Results: Neural network analysis yielded an accuracy of 96.4% (sensitivity: 91.2%, specificity: 97.7%) and an area under the ROC curve of 0.966. The order of importance of risk factors included in the prediction model is in descending order of importance: waiting time; patient non-compliance to the treatment process; patient's skepticism toward care; number of caregivers; medical professionals' failure to respond to patients' needs; and history of psychosomatic diseases. The SVM utilizing 10-fold cross-validation demonstrated an accuracy of 96.4% in independent testing samples, with a sensitivity of 91.2% and a specificity of 97.2%. Conclusion: This model may accurately predict the occurrence of medical conflicts in emergency departments with high accuracy, providing a theoretical basis for preventing medical conflicts. Implications for management: We have developed a risk prediction model to help emergency medical professionals identify factors that may contribute to preventing medical conflict, reducing conflict events, and enhancing the doctor-patient relationship.
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.