Imagining the future of diagnostic performance feedback-Reference-Cited by-同舟云学术

Imagining the future of diagnostic performance feedback

Published:2022-11-16 Issue:1 Volume:10 Page:31-37
ISSN:2194-802X
Container-title:Diagnosis
language:en
Short-container-title:

Author:

Rosner Benjamin I.¹^ORCID,Zwaan Laura²^ORCID,Olson Andrew P.J.³^ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Division of Hospital Medicine and Center for Clinical Informatics and Improvement Research , University of California , San Francisco , CA , USA

2. Institute of Medical Education Research Rotterdam, Erasmus MC , Rotterdam , Netherlands

3. University of Minnesota , Minneapolis , MN , USA

Abstract

Abstract Diagnostic performance is uniquely challenging to measure, and providing feedback on diagnostic performance to catalyze diagnostic recalibration remains the exception to the rule in healthcare. Diagnostic accuracy, timeliness, and explanation to the patient are essential dimensions of diagnostic performance that each intersect with a variety of technical, contextual, cultural, and policy barriers. Setting aside assumptions about current constraints, we explore the future of diagnostic performance feedback by describing the “minimum viable products” and the “ideal state” solutions that can be envisioned for each of several important barriers. Only through deliberate and iterative approaches to breaking down these barriers can we improve recalibration and continuously drive the healthcare ecosystem towards diagnostic excellence.

Funder

Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation

Publisher

Walter de Gruyter GmbH

Subject

Biochemistry (medical),Clinical Biochemistry,Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,Health Policy,Medicine (miscellaneous)

Link

https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/dx-2022-0055/pdf

Reference22 articles.

1. Singh, H, Meyer, AND, Thomas, EJ. The frequency of diagnostic errors in outpatient care: estimations from three large observational studies involving US adult populations. BMJ Qual Saf 2014;23:727–31. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2013-002627.

2. Zwaan, L, Singh, H. The challenges in defining and measuring diagnostic error. Diagnosis 2015;2:97–103. https://doi.org/10.1515/dx-2014-0069.

3. Konopasky, A, Artino, AR, Battista, A, Ohmer, M, Hemmer, PA, Torre, D, et al.. Understanding context specificity: the effect of contextual factors on clinical reasoning. Diagnosis 2020;7:257–64. https://doi.org/10.1515/dx-2020-0016.