Cited by 101Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic SkillsInnovations in Medical EducationPatient Safety and Medication Errors

Competencies for improving diagnosis: an interprofessional framework for education and training in health care

Open access
Olson, Andrew, Rencic, Joseph, Cosby, Karen, Rusz, Diana, Papa, Frank, Croskerry, Pat, Zierler, Brenda, Harkless, Gene +7 more·2019·Diagnosis

Abstract

Background: Given an unacceptably high incidence of diagnostic errors, we sought to identify the key competencies that should be considered for inclusion in health professions education programs to improve the quality and safety of diagnosis in clinical practice. Methods: An interprofessional group reviewed existing competency expectations for multiple health professions, and conducted a search that explored quality, safety, and competency in diagnosis. An iterative series of group discussions and concept prioritization was used to derive a final set of competencies. Results: Twelve competencies were identified: Six of these are individual competencies: The first four (#1–#4) focus on acquiring the key information needed for diagnosis and formulating an appropriate, prioritized differential diagnosis; individual competency #5 is taking advantage of second opinions, decision support, and checklists; and #6 is using reflection and critical thinking to improve diagnostic performance. Three competencies focus on teamwork: Involving the patient and family (#1) and all relevant health professionals (#2) in the diagnostic process; and (#3) ensuring safe transitions of care and handoffs, and “closing the loop” on test result communication. The final three competencies emphasize system-related aspects of care: (#1) Understanding how human-factor elements influence the diagnostic process; (#2) developing a supportive culture; and (#3) reporting and disclosing diagnostic errors that are recognized, and learning from both successful diagnosis and from diagnostic errors. Conclusions: These newly defined competencies are relevant to all health professions education programs and should be incorporated into educational programs.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1515/dx-2018-0107

Cites

17 of 17 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?

  • The clinical case vignettes curated and summarized by human clinicians do not capture competence in many other areas important to clinical reasoning, including patient interviewing and data collection.

    “The clinical case vignettes were curated and summarized by human clinicians, a pragmatic and common approach to isolate the diagnostic reasoning process, but this does not capture competence in many other areas important to clinical reasoning, including patient interviewing and data collection.37”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Olson, A., Rencic, J., Cosby, K., Rusz, D., Papa, F., Croskerry, P., Zierler, B., Harkless, G., Giuliano, M. A., Schoenbaum, S., Colford, C., Cahill, M., Gerstner, L., Grice, G. R., & Graber, M. L.
Affiliations
  • University of Minnesota (US)
  • Tufts University (US)
  • Rush University Medical Center (US)
  • Society to Improve Diagnosis in Medicine , Chicago, IL , USA
  • University of North Texas Health Science Center (US)
  • Dalhousie University (CA)
  • University of Washington (US)
  • University of New Hampshire (US)
  • Hackensack Meridian School of Medicine (US)
  • Josiah Macy Jr Foundation (US)
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
  • National Council of State Boards of Nursing (US)
  • Campbell University (US)
  • University of Health Sciences and Pharmacy (US)
  • Chief Medical Officer, Society to Improve Diagnosis in Medicine , New York, NY , USA
Corresponding author
Graber, Mark L.
Venue
Diagnosis
Published
2019-07-04
Volume
6
Issue
4
Pages
335-341
ISSN
  • 2194-8011 (ISSN-L)
  • 2194-802X
OpenAlex
W2955744164
Cited by
101
References
17
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 6
FWCI
11.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Diagnosis (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Emergency Medical Services › Patient Safety and Medication Errors
Keywords
diagnostic errors, diagnostic skills, interprofessional education, health professions education, differential diagnosis, second opinion, clinical decision support, checklists, critical thinking, teamwork, patient and family involvement, handover, test result communication, human factors, organizational culture, error reporting, learning from mistakes
MeSH terms
Clinical Competence, Communication, Curriculum, Delivery of Health Care, Diagnostic Errors, Diagnostic Tests, Routine, Health Personnel, Humans, Interprofessional Relations, Patient Care Team, Preceptorship, Quality of Health Care, Incidence, Patient Safety

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