Taro Shimizu, Wolf E Hautz, Charlotte van Sassen, Laura Zwaan
{"title":"The global progress for improving diagnosis: what we've learned, what comes next.","authors":"Taro Shimizu, Wolf E Hautz, Charlotte van Sassen, Laura Zwaan","doi":"10.1515/dx-2025-0109","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Since the 2015 National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine report on Improving Diagnosis in Health Care, global awareness of diagnostic safety has grown substantially. Progress has been most visible in high-income countries, with emerging international research networks, conferences, and educational programs. Australia and New Zealand have advanced incident reporting systems, specialty-specific diagnostic safety tools, and educational resources. European initiatives have expanded research on clinical reasoning, bias, and safety-netting, developed competency-based curricula, and investigated digital innovations including decision support systems. Japan has built on a strong tradition of clinical reasoning mastery, advancing theoretical frameworks, cultural analysis, and AI-based diagnostic support, and hosting major regional conferences. Despite these gains, engagement remains uneven, with limited data from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Barriers include resource constraints, underdeveloped infrastructure, and differing disease burdens that challenge the transferability of AI and other innovations. Future progress requires clear, measurable objectives across five domains: research, education, practice improvement, patient engagement, and policy. Recommendations include establishing national diagnostic error databases, promoting multicenter research in underrepresented settings, expanding standardized curricula, implementing structured audit-and-feedback systems, integrating patient perspectives, and embedding diagnostic safety indicators in policy and reimbursement frameworks. International collaboration, context-sensitive methodologies, and robust governance for emerging technologies are critical to ensure equitable improvements. By leveraging shared learning, strengthening capacity in LMICs, and aligning efforts with global policy frameworks, the diagnostic safety movement can evolve from fragmented initiatives to a cohesive, sustainable worldwide strategy, aiming for safer, more reliable diagnosis by 2035.</p>","PeriodicalId":11273,"journal":{"name":"Diagnosis","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diagnosis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/dx-2025-0109","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Since the 2015 National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine report on Improving Diagnosis in Health Care, global awareness of diagnostic safety has grown substantially. Progress has been most visible in high-income countries, with emerging international research networks, conferences, and educational programs. Australia and New Zealand have advanced incident reporting systems, specialty-specific diagnostic safety tools, and educational resources. European initiatives have expanded research on clinical reasoning, bias, and safety-netting, developed competency-based curricula, and investigated digital innovations including decision support systems. Japan has built on a strong tradition of clinical reasoning mastery, advancing theoretical frameworks, cultural analysis, and AI-based diagnostic support, and hosting major regional conferences. Despite these gains, engagement remains uneven, with limited data from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Barriers include resource constraints, underdeveloped infrastructure, and differing disease burdens that challenge the transferability of AI and other innovations. Future progress requires clear, measurable objectives across five domains: research, education, practice improvement, patient engagement, and policy. Recommendations include establishing national diagnostic error databases, promoting multicenter research in underrepresented settings, expanding standardized curricula, implementing structured audit-and-feedback systems, integrating patient perspectives, and embedding diagnostic safety indicators in policy and reimbursement frameworks. International collaboration, context-sensitive methodologies, and robust governance for emerging technologies are critical to ensure equitable improvements. By leveraging shared learning, strengthening capacity in LMICs, and aligning efforts with global policy frameworks, the diagnostic safety movement can evolve from fragmented initiatives to a cohesive, sustainable worldwide strategy, aiming for safer, more reliable diagnosis by 2035.
期刊介绍:
Diagnosis focuses on how diagnosis can be advanced, how it is taught, and how and why it can fail, leading to diagnostic errors. The journal welcomes both fundamental and applied works, improvement initiatives, opinions, and debates to encourage new thinking on improving this critical aspect of healthcare quality. Topics: -Factors that promote diagnostic quality and safety -Clinical reasoning -Diagnostic errors in medicine -The factors that contribute to diagnostic error: human factors, cognitive issues, and system-related breakdowns -Improving the value of diagnosis – eliminating waste and unnecessary testing -How culture and removing blame promote awareness of diagnostic errors -Training and education related to clinical reasoning and diagnostic skills -Advances in laboratory testing and imaging that improve diagnostic capability -Local, national and international initiatives to reduce diagnostic error