• LOGIN
    Login with username and password
Repository logo

BORIS Portal

Bern Open Repository and Information System

  • Publications
  • Theses
  • Research Data
  • Projects
  • Organizations
  • Researchers
  • More
  • Collections
  • Statistics
  • LOGIN
    Login with username and password
Repository logo
Unibern.ch
  1. Home
  2. Publications
  3. Identification of diagnostic discrepancies as a quality assurance measure in emergency medicine - a validation study.

Identification of diagnostic discrepancies as a quality assurance measure in emergency medicine - a validation study.

Details
Files
DOI
10.48620/94687
Publisher DOI
10.1186/s13049-026-01572-x
PubMed ID
41673906
Abstract
Background
Diagnostic errors are a major care health concern but remain difficult to study because their identification often requires resource-intensive chart reviews. We aimed to validate a previously proposed automated method for detecting discrepancies between an initial and a later, more definitive diagnosis as a screening tool for potential diagnostic errors in a large, prospective cohort of emergency department (ED) patients.
Methods
This secondary analysis included 1,204 patients enrolled in the DDxBRO randomized trial, which evaluated the effect of a diagnostic decision support tool on diagnostic quality in four Swiss emergency departments. For each patient, the ED diagnosis was extracted from the ED discharge letter, and the follow-up diagnosis at 14 days was obtained from hospital discharge letters, or general practitioner notes. All diagnoses were coded using ICD-10 and manually classified for discrepancies by two blinded ED physicians according to a predefined scheme. The automated method calculated the "similarity" between ICD-10 codes for ED and follow-up diagnoses. Discriminative performance of this method to distinguish between cases with and without diagnostic error was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, and sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values were assessed across multiple cutoffs.
Results
The automated method showed high and consistent discriminative performance across all algorithms tested, with areas under the ROC curve (AUCs) ranging from 0.94 to 0.95. Using the most sensitive cutoff in the simplest algorithm, all true discrepancies were detected, but 162 cases (15%) were incorrectly flagged as discrepant.
Conclusion
The automated method demonstrated high accuracy and shows promise as a practical screening tool to prioritize cases for resource-intensive chart review.
Trial Registration
NCT05346523.
Date Issued
2026-02-11
Publication Type
Article
Subject(s)
600 Technology > 610 Medicine & health
Subjects
Diagnostic errors
•
Emergency medicine
•
Misdiagnosis
Language(s)
en
Author(s)
Marcin, Thimo  
Department of Emergency Medicine  
Werthmüller, Nadine  
Department of Emergency Medicine  
Kölbener, Fabian  
Department of Emergency Medicine  
Müller, Martin  
Department of Emergency Medicine  
Zwaan, Laura
Hautz, Stefanie C.  
Department of Emergency Medicine  
Schuster, Alexander
Exadaktylos, Aristomenis  
Department of Emergency Medicine  
Hautz, Wolf E.  
Department of Emergency Medicine  
Additional Credits
Department of Emergency Medicine  
Journal
Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine
Publisher
BioMed Central
ISSN
1757-7241
Access(Rights)
open.access
Show full item
BORIS Portal
Bern Open Repository and Information System
Build: 0eaa7c [ 7.08. 11:06]
Explore
  • Projects
  • Funding
  • Publications
  • Research Data
  • Organizations
  • Researchers
  • Audiovisual Material
  • Software & other digital items
  • Events
More
  • About BORIS Portal
  • BORIS Portal & Open Science
  • Send Feedback
  • Cookie settings
  • Service Policy
Follow us on
  • Mastodon
  • YouTube
  • LinkedIn
UniBe logo
Repository logo COAR Notify