ReviewFrontiers in medicine2026
Delayed diagnosis of selected thoracic and mediastinal conditions in young adults: a focused narrative review of clinical pitfalls, cognitive biases, and system barriers.
Review in Frontiers in 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Thoracic and mediastinal conditions affecting the esophagus, diaphragm, mediastinum, and airway carry considerable morbidity when diagnosis is delayed. Young adults are often perceived as low risk for serious thoracic disease, and low clinical suspicion, atypical symptoms, and cognitive and healthcare-system barriers can delay recognition. Methods: This focused narrative review searched PubMed and Scopus, supplemented by Google Scholar, for studies published between January 2000 and May 2026, with selected earlier landmark studies retained where essential. Search terms included "thoracic surgical conditions," "young adults," "late diagnosis," "misdiagnosis," and "unusual presentation." Five conditions were selected purposively to illustrate contrasting mechanisms and time-courses of diagnostic delay rather than to catalogue thoracic disease exhaustively. No formal systematic search protocol, study-level quality appraisal, or narrative-review quality instrument was applied. Results: Five diagnostic categories are examined: esophageal perforation and Boerhaave syndrome, traumatic diaphragmatic injury, primary mediastinal germ cell tumors, airway tumors misdiagnosed as asthma, and Hodgkin lymphoma presenting as an anterior mediastinal mass. Hodgkin lymphoma is included as a mediastinal diagnostic pitfall because it resembles other anterior mediastinal tumors and requires histological sampling for definitive diagnosis. Together, these conditions illustrate how overlapping cognitive and systemic barriers contribute to diagnostic delay. The strength and age relevance of the supporting evidence differ markedly between conditions and are stated explicitly, as much of the foundational literature derives from broader adult populations rather than cohorts restricted to ages 18-40. Conclusions: Diagnostic delay reflects the combined effects of non-specific presentation, anchoring, premature closure, limited access to imaging, and delayed specialist referral. Consequences differ by condition: in acute mechanical and perforation emergencies, delays measured in hours may affect contamination, deterioration, and operative complexity, whereas in indolent mediastinal malignancies delay principally affects diagnostic complexity, symptom and psychological burden, and time to staging and treatment, while prognosis remains strongly influenced by histological subtype and tumor biology. Structured reassessment after an unexpected treatment response, timely cross-sectional imaging, disease-specific testing, and early specialist referral are practical measures available to first-contact clinicians.
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.