Symptom-Disease Pair Analysis of Diagnostic Error (SPADE): a conceptual framework and methodological approach for unearthing misdiagnosis-related harms using big data

Author:

Liberman Ava L,Newman-Toker David EORCID

Abstract

BackgroundThe public health burden associated with diagnostic errors is likely enormous, with some estimates suggesting millions of individuals are harmed each year in the USA, and presumably many more worldwide. According to the US National Academy of Medicine, improving diagnosis in healthcare is now considered ‘a moral, professional, and public health imperative.’ Unfortunately, well-established, valid and readily available operational measures of diagnostic performance and misdiagnosis-related harms are lacking, hampering progress. Existing methods often rely on judging errors through labour-intensive human reviews of medical records that are constrained by poor clinical documentation, low reliability and hindsight bias.MethodsKey gaps in operational measurement might be filled via thoughtful statistical analysis of existing large clinical, billing, administrative claims or similar data sets. In this manuscript, we describe a method to quantify and monitor diagnostic errors using an approach we call ‘Symptom-Disease Pair Analysis of Diagnostic Error’ (SPADE).ResultsWe first offer a conceptual framework for establishing valid symptom-disease pairs illustrated using the well-known diagnostic error dyad of dizziness-stroke. We then describe analytical methods for both look-back (case–control) and look-forward (cohort) measures of diagnostic error and misdiagnosis-related harms using ‘big data’. After discussing the strengths and limitations of the SPADE approach by comparing it to other strategies for detecting diagnostic errors, we identify the sources of validity and reliability that undergird our approach.ConclusionSPADE-derived metrics could eventually be used for operational diagnostic performance dashboards and national benchmarking. This approach has the potential to transform diagnostic quality and safety across a broad range of clinical problems and settings.

Funder

National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders

Armstrong Institute Center for Diagnostic Excellence

Publisher

BMJ

Subject

Health Policy

Reference73 articles.

1. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Improving diagnosis in health care. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2015.

2. The frequency of diagnostic errors in outpatient care: estimations from three large observational studies involving US adult populations

3. Types and origins of diagnostic errors in primary care settings;Singh;JAMA Intern Med,2013

4. Newman-Toker DE . Diagnostic value: the economics of high-quality diagnosis and a value-based perspective on diagnostic innovation [lecture]. Modern Healthcare 3rd Annual Patient Safety & Quality Virtual Conference;2015 June 17;online e-conference.

5. The global burden of diagnostic errors in primary care

Cited by 75 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3