Abstract:Background: The 21st Century Cures Act enables patients to access their medical records, thus providing a unique opportunity to engage patients in their diagnostic journey. Objective: To explore the concordance between patients' self-reported diagnostic concerns and clinician-interpreted information in their electronic health records. Design: We conducted a mixed-methods analysis of a cohort of 467 patients who completed a structured data collection instrument (the Safer Dx Patient) to identify diagnostic concerns while reviewing their clinician's notes. We conducted a qualitative content analysis of open-ended responses on both the tools and the case summaries. Two clinical chart reviewers, blinded to patient-reported diagnostic concerns, independently conducted chart reviews using a different structured instrument (the Revised Safer Dx Instrument) to identify diagnostic concerns and generate case summaries. The primary outcome variable was chart review-identified diagnostic concerns. Multivariate logistic regression tested whether the primary outcome was concordant with patient-reported diagnostic concerns. Setting: Geisinger, a large integrated healthcare organization in rural and semi-urban Pennsylvania. Participants: Cohort of adult patients actively using patient portals and identified as "at-risk" for diagnostic concerns using an electronic trigger algorithm based on unexpected visit patterns in a primary care setting. Results: In 467 cohort patients, chart review identified 31 (6.4%) diagnostic concerns, of which only 11 (21.5%) overlapped with 51 patient-reported diagnostic concerns. Content analysis revealed several areas of discordant understanding of the diagnostic process between clinicians and patients. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that clinician-identified diagnostic concerns were associated with patients who self-reported "I feel I was incorrectly diagnosed during my visit" (odds ratio 1.65, 95% CI 1.17-2.3, p < 0.05). Conclusion: Patients and clinicians appear to have certain differences in their mental models of what is considered a diagnostic concern. Efforts to integrate patient perspectives and experiences with the diagnostic process can lead to better measurement of diagnostic safety.

Reflections on Diagnosis and Diagnostic Errors: a Survey of Internal Medicine Resident and Attending Physicians

The Big Three diagnostic errors through reflections of Japanese internists

Charting Diagnostic Safety: Exploring Patient-Provider Discordance in Medical Record Documentation

"What Else Could It Be?" A Scoping Review of Questions for Patients to Ask Throughout the Diagnostic Process

Using Patient Experience Surveys to Identify Potential Diagnostic Safety Breakdowns: A Mixed Methods Study

Hospital commitments to address diagnostic errors: An assessment of 95 US hospitals

Diagnostic error in mental health: a review

Diagnostic reasoning and cognitive error in emergency medicine: Implications for teaching and learning

The diagnostic certainty levels of junior clinicians: A retrospective cohort study

Do house officers learn from their mistakes?

Diagnostic errors in Dentistry, opinions of egyptian dental teaching staff, a cross-sectional study

The impact of errors on healthcare professionals in the critical care setting

Toward the eradication of medical diagnostic errors

Exploring Knowledge of Cognitive Disposition to Respond in Clinical Decision-Making among Early Clinical Learners

Enabling diagnostic excellence in the real world: Managing complexity, uncertainty and clinical responsibility

Diagnostic Discrepancies in the Emergency Department: A Retrospective Study

Diagnostic Errors in Hospitalized Adults Who Died or Were Transferred to Intensive Care

Exploring Clinical Lessons Learned by Experienced Hospitalists from Diagnostic Errors and Successes

Diagnostic decision-making and strategies to improve diagnosis

Methods for and Challenges in Seeking Diagnostic Excellence

Online public response to emergency department diagnostic error report: A qualitative study