ArticleJournal of hospital medicine2026
A multi-institutional rapid qualitative assessment of factors supporting diagnostic excellence in hospital medicine.
Article in Journal of hospital medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Diagnostic excellence: Learning from what goes right.Journal of hospital medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDiagnostic errors among hospitalized adults are prevalent and costly. Traditional approaches that focus on identifying and fixing mistakes (Safety-I) may fall short in the dynamic and complex hospital environment. Instead, focusing on approaches that emphasize the understanding of how things go right and adapt to challenges (Safety-II) may offer better insights into what contributes to accurate and timely diagnoses.
objectivesWe sought to characterize hospitalists' perceptions of diagnostic excellence and the factors and adaptations needed to achieve it.
methodsFocus groups were conducted in partnership with the Hospital Medicine Reengineering Network (HOMERuN). We interviewed physicians, researchers, and patient representatives about (1) recognition of diagnostic excellence, (2) what makes diagnostic journeys go well, and (3) factors that facilitate diagnosis in difficult situations. Rapid qualitative methods including templated summaries and matrix analysis were applied to analyze these focus groups.
resultsWe conducted five focus groups with 36 individuals from 23 unique institutions. Participants shared three factors that facilitate a successful diagnostic journey: clinical reasoning that is structured yet adaptive, collaborative diagnosis through teamwork, and systems-level support for diagnostic capacity. Participants readily recognized diagnostic excellence, though noted the challenge in systematically identifying these cases.
conclusionsWhile diagnostic excellence case identification is seen as a challenge, providers do note people, process, and technology opportunities to support better diagnosis. Optimization of diagnosis in hospital medicine may benefit from a focus on team and communication redesign, adaptive technology development, and workload management.
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.