Cited by 7Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic SkillsHealthcare cost, quality, practicesMedicine, History, and Philosophy

Our stubborn quest for diagnostic certainty

·1989·New England Journal of Medicine

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejm198911023211820

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Tools to support EHR notes and tools are frequently both over- and underdesigned at the same time.

    “These benefits are particularly salient for tools to support EHR notes and tools, which are frequently both over- and underdesigned at the same time (17, 18) and are often designed with minimal or no end-user input (5).”
  • Residents and patient safety experts alike note that care transitions represent natural moments for explicit acknowledgment and discussion of diagnostic uncertainty to decrease the risk of poor information transfer and avoid premature closure.

    “In focus groups, residents highlighted the importance of accurate handoff and highlighted uncertainty due to information transfer: residents and patient safety experts alike note that care transitions represent natural moments for explicit acknowledgment and discussion of diagnostic uncertainty to decrease the risk of poor information transfer and avoid premature closure.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
1989-11-02
Volume
321
Issue
18
Pages
1272-1273
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W4246902738
Cited by
7
References
5
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2013: 1
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • New England Journal of Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Healthcare cost, quality, practices
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Medicine, History, and Philosophy
Keywords
diagnostic certainty, diagnostic uncertainty, diagnosis, diagnostic testing
MeSH terms
Diagnosis, Humans

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review