ArticleJournal of general and family medicine2026
Diagnostic Reasoning in General Internal Medicine Consultations: A Text Mining Analysis of Consultation Requests.
Article in Journal of general and family medicine, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Diagnostic reasoning is often difficult to evaluate because it is largely internal, and linguistic features associated with consultation quality remain poorly understood. Consultation requests may provide a useful window into real-time diagnostic thinking. We used text mining to examine how language in consultation requests reflects diagnostic reasoning in general internal medicine. Methods: We conducted a single-center retrospective observational study of diagnostic consultation requests from the Department of Diagnostic and Generalist Medicine at a Japanese university hospital in 2021. Consultations were grouped using an outcome-based operational definition of appropriateness, centered on whether the first specialty department established the correct final diagnosis, with an additional concordance requirement when a specific diagnosis was strongly suspected. Text mining using KH Coder included co-occurrence network analysis, correspondence analysis, and keyword-in-context (KWIC) concordance analysis. Results: Among 352 consultations, 229 were classified as appropriate and 123 as inappropriate. Appropriate consultations were characterized by terms indicating clear abnormalities and disease progression, whereas inappropriate consultations were associated with terms reflecting limited diagnostic direction, such as "unknown" and "negative". KWIC analysis showed two uses of "negative": revising the differential diagnosis after negative results and maintaining suspicion despite negative findings. In inappropriate consultations, these patterns were accompanied by potentially insufficient assessment/documentation and diagnostic uncertainty. Conclusions: Text mining of consultation requests revealed linguistic features associated with consultation appropriateness and showed that "negative" reflected distinct diagnostic reasoning moves. Consultation request text may provide a scalable window into diagnostic reasoning and identify opportunities to improve diagnostic communication and consultation quality.
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.