‘Undiagnosing’ neurological disease: how to do it, and when not to
Abstract
Neurologists often pride themselves on their diagnostic skills (figure 1). Indeed, we often assume that having made a firm diagnosis, the flow of initial treatment and longer-term management will follow almost automatically. But with long-term review of patients, neurologists are perhaps better than most at challenging the so-called ‘established diagnoses’; not infrequently they question a previously assigned diagnostic label, or even find it necessary to remove a diagnosis from a patient. Removing a diagnosis lacks a descriptive verb; euphemisms might include ‘maturation of the diagnosis’, ‘diagnostic refinement’ and so on. We suggest that the more robust term ‘undiagnosis’. Stone et al 1 have discussed the different degrees of diagnostic shift. Here we address specifically the process of dealing with previous diagnostic errors, imparting a new diagnosis and removing a previous one. Figure 1 Undiagnosing sometimes requires the skills of Sherlock Holmes. The process of ‘undiagnosing’ has not been studied in any detail; some might argue that it does not merit detailed study. Yet, the impact of the removal of a long-held diagnosis—not just on the patient, but also on their family, carers and other health professionals—may be substantial. Some might assume that removing an erroneous diagnosis could only be a positive event for a patient, but our experience suggests otherwise. We have witnessed the creation of considerable distress, anger and frustration in individuals who may ha…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Misdiagnosis can cause psychological harm in patients if they partially shape their identity around a diagnosis of MS or FND that they are later informed is incorrect.
“Misdiagnosis can also cause psychological harm in patients if they partially shape their identity around a diagnosis of MS or FND that they are later informed is incorrect [4, 5].”
From Functional neurological disorder and multiple sclerosis: a systematic review of misdiagnosis and clinical overlap (2022) · cites this paper as [5]
Patients can shape their identity around their diagnosis, and it is difficult for neurologists to remove a diagnosis of MS without concern of causing yet more harm to the patient.
“Patients can shape their identity around their diagnosis, and it is difficult for neurologists to remove a diagnosis of MS without concern of causing yet more harm to the patient [4, 5].”
From Functional neurological disorder and multiple sclerosis: a systematic review of misdiagnosis and clinical overlap (2022) · cites this paper as [5]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Walzl, D., Solomon, A. J., & Stone, J. (2022) · Journal of Neurology · doi:10.1007/s00415-021-10436-6 · Cited by 62 · see citing works
- Authors
- Coebergh, J. A., Wren, D. R., & Mumford, C. J.
- Affiliations
- St George's Hospital (GB)
- Western General Hospital (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Coebergh, Jan A
- ORCID
- Coebergh, Jan A
- Venue
- Practical Neurology
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2014-03-24
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 436-439
- ISSN
- 1474-7758 (ISSN-L)
- 1474-7766
- OpenAlex
- W2166825655
- Cited by
- 14
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2024: 6 · 2023: 3 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2016: 1
- FWCI
- 0.34
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Practical Neurology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Radiology practices and education
- Keywords
- diagnostic errors, diagnostic shift, neurological diagnosis, Parkinson's disease, multiple sclerosis, MRI findings, patient distress
- MeSH terms
- Humans, Nervous System Diseases, Neurology, Physicians
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