ArticlePloS one2026
Development and evaluation of a technology-enhanced simulation to measure physician decision making in trauma triage.
Article in PloS one, 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
Abstract
purposeVariable implementation of clinical practice guidelines causes preventable morbidity and mortality. The paucity of valid and reliable measures of physician performance impedes efforts to improve implementation. The objective of this study was to evaluate a low-cost, scalable simulation method to evaluate physician non-adherence to guidelines, using trauma triage in Emergency Departments (EDs) as an archetypal clinical problem.
methodsWe created an online simulation that mimicked the task environment of a non-trauma center ED. We recruited a sample of ED physicians, asked them to use the simulation, and obtained the electronic health records of injured patients treated by these physicians in the prior 3 years. We used signal detection theory, a behavioral science method, to analyze triage performance. The method quantified the influence of 2 determinants of non-adherence: perceptual sensitivity (diagnostic accuracy) and decisional threshold (revealed preferences for false positive/negative decisions). We collected evidence of the simulation's response process, internal structure, content validity, and relations with other variables.
resultsAmong 180 invited physicians, 60/180 (33%) enrolled and 45/60 (75%) participated; 38/45 (84%) had accessible electronic records. Physicians completed an average of 20/26 simulation trauma cases, spending 2.6 minutes/case (SD 1.8), and making 2.6 decisions/case (SD 1.7). Responses to similar types of simulation cases were consistent (Cronbach's alpha 0.80-0.86). Users reported strong content validity. Perceptual sensitivity on the simulation and in real-life correlated moderately well among physicians who evaluated ≥10 severely injured patients/year (rho 0.46, 95% CI 0.07-0.76, p = 0.025), but not lower volumes (rho -0.26, 95% CI -0.87-0.50, p = 0.39); decisional thresholds were uncorrelated (rho 0.22, 95% CI -0.12-0.51, p = 0.18).
conclusionsThe technology- and behavioral science-enhanced simulation demonstrated evidence of validity across multiple domains, with mixed findings for relations with other variables. With further refinement, it offers a promising avenue for studying physician decision making in trauma triage, with possible application to other clinical domains.
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.