{"title":"The patient narrative distortion index (PNDI): a framework to detect narrative loss as a hidden driver of diagnostic error.","authors":"Yogesh Kumar Gupta","doi":"10.1515/dx-2026-0086","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Patient narratives are foundational to diagnosis, yet clinicians frequently and unintentionally distort, minimize, or reinterpret these narratives during clinical encounters. These distortions - termed patient narrative distortion - are unmeasured contributors to diagnostic error [G.D. Schiff, O. Hasan, S. Kim, R. Abrams, K. Cosby, B.L. Lambert et al., Diagnostic error in medicine: analysis of 583 physician-reported errors, Arch Intern Med 169 (2009) 1881-1887; P. Croskerry, The importance of cognitive errors in diagnosis and strategies to minimize them, Acad Med 78 (2003) 775-780; H. Singh, A.N.D. Meyer, E.J. Thomas, The frequency of diagnostic errors in outpatient care, BMJ Qual Saf 23 (2014) 727-731; and M.L. Graber, N. Franklin, R. Gordon, Diagnostic error in internal medicine, Arch Intern Med 165 (2005) 1493-1499], emotional harm [J. Conway, F. Federico, K. Stewart, M.J. Campbell, Respectful Management of Serious Clinical Adverse Events, IHI Innovation Series White Paper, IHI, Cambridge, MA, 2011], and inequity [E.N. Chapman, A. Kaatz, M. Carnes, Physicians and implicit bias: how it affects clinical decision making, Acad Med 88 (2013) 354-360; and M. Marmot, R.G. Wilkinson (Eds.), Social Determinants of Health, 2nd ed., Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2005]. No existing safety tool captures the fidelity with which clinicians preserve patient stories [T. Greenhalgh, B. Hurwitz (Eds.), Narrative Based Medicine: Dialogue and Discourse in Clinical Practice, BMJ Books, London, 1998; and W. Levinson, D.L. Roter, J.P. Mullooly, V.T. Dull, R.M. Frankel, Physician-patient communication: the relationship with malpractice claims, JAMA 277 (1997) 553-559]. The stages at which narrative distortion emerges are illustrated in Figure 1. The objective of this article was to define patient narrative distortion as a measurable construct, develop a five-domain taxonomy, propose a scoring system (PNDI), and outline a workflow and validation strategy for clinical use.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted iterative conceptual modeling and structured synthesis of the diagnostic-safety and narrative-medicine literatures [G.D. Schiff, O. Hasan, S. Kim, R. Abrams, K. Cosby, B.L. Lambert et al., Diagnostic error in medicine: analysis of 583 physician-reported errors, Arch Intern Med 169 (2009) 1881-1887; P. Croskerry, The importance of cognitive errors in diagnosis and strategies to minimize them, Acad Med 78 (2003) 775-780; H. Singh, A.N.D. Meyer, E.J. Thomas, The frequency of diagnostic errors in outpatient care, BMJ Qual Saf 23 (2014) 727-731; and M.L. Graber, N. Franklin, R. Gordon, Diagnostic error in internal medicine, Arch Intern Med 165 (2005) 1493-1499] to identify core distortion modes, develop domain definitions, item-level anchors, and scoring thresholds. We propose a multi-phase validation plan including content validity, inter-rater reliability, construct validity, criterion validity, and responsiveness.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The PNDI taxonomy includes five domains: Narrative Completeness Distortion, Meaning Substitution Distortion, Salience Distortion, Context Stripping Distortion, and Bias-Driven Distortion [E.N. Chapman, A. Kaatz, M. Carnes, Physicians and implicit bias: how it affects clinical decision making, Acad Med 88 (2013) 354-360]. Each domain includes 0-3 severity anchors and real-world clinical examples. The total PNDI score ranges from 0-15, with interpretation bands for narrative integrity and safety risk. Encounter-level, unit-level, and organizational-level workflows for implementation are outlined. The five-domain PNDI taxonomy is shown in Figure 2.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>PNDI operationalizes narrative integrity as a measurable dimension of diagnostic safety [The Joint Commission, National Patient Safety Goals: Improving Diagnosis in Health Care 2024-2026, The Joint Commission, Oakbrook Terrace, IL, 2024]. It provides clinicians, educators, and safety teams with a practical tool to detect narrative loss, reduce diagnostic error [G.D. Schiff, O. Hasan, S. Kim, R. Abrams, K. Cosby, B.L. Lambert et al., Diagnostic error in medicine: analysis of 583 physician-reported errors, Arch Intern Med 169 (2009) 1881-1887; P. Croskerry, The importance of cognitive errors in diagnosis and strategies to minimize them, Acad Med 78 (2003) 775-780; H. Singh, A.N.D. Meyer, E.J. Thomas, The frequency of diagnostic errors in outpatient care, BMJ Qual Saf 23 (2014) 727-731; and M.L. Graber, N. Franklin, R. Gordon, Diagnostic error in internal medicine, Arch Intern Med 165 (2005) 1493-1499], and strengthen patient trust [W. Levinson, D.L. Roter, J.P. Mullooly, V.T. Dull, R.M. Frankel, Physician-patient communication: the relationship with malpractice claims, JAMA 277 (1997) 553-559].</p>","PeriodicalId":11273,"journal":{"name":"Diagnosis","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-15","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-2026-0086","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
Background: Patient narratives are foundational to diagnosis, yet clinicians frequently and unintentionally distort, minimize, or reinterpret these narratives during clinical encounters. These distortions - termed patient narrative distortion - are unmeasured contributors to diagnostic error [G.D. Schiff, O. Hasan, S. Kim, R. Abrams, K. Cosby, B.L. Lambert et al., Diagnostic error in medicine: analysis of 583 physician-reported errors, Arch Intern Med 169 (2009) 1881-1887; P. Croskerry, The importance of cognitive errors in diagnosis and strategies to minimize them, Acad Med 78 (2003) 775-780; H. Singh, A.N.D. Meyer, E.J. Thomas, The frequency of diagnostic errors in outpatient care, BMJ Qual Saf 23 (2014) 727-731; and M.L. Graber, N. Franklin, R. Gordon, Diagnostic error in internal medicine, Arch Intern Med 165 (2005) 1493-1499], emotional harm [J. Conway, F. Federico, K. Stewart, M.J. Campbell, Respectful Management of Serious Clinical Adverse Events, IHI Innovation Series White Paper, IHI, Cambridge, MA, 2011], and inequity [E.N. Chapman, A. Kaatz, M. Carnes, Physicians and implicit bias: how it affects clinical decision making, Acad Med 88 (2013) 354-360; and M. Marmot, R.G. Wilkinson (Eds.), Social Determinants of Health, 2nd ed., Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2005]. No existing safety tool captures the fidelity with which clinicians preserve patient stories [T. Greenhalgh, B. Hurwitz (Eds.), Narrative Based Medicine: Dialogue and Discourse in Clinical Practice, BMJ Books, London, 1998; and W. Levinson, D.L. Roter, J.P. Mullooly, V.T. Dull, R.M. Frankel, Physician-patient communication: the relationship with malpractice claims, JAMA 277 (1997) 553-559]. The stages at which narrative distortion emerges are illustrated in Figure 1. The objective of this article was to define patient narrative distortion as a measurable construct, develop a five-domain taxonomy, propose a scoring system (PNDI), and outline a workflow and validation strategy for clinical use.
Methods: We conducted iterative conceptual modeling and structured synthesis of the diagnostic-safety and narrative-medicine literatures [G.D. Schiff, O. Hasan, S. Kim, R. Abrams, K. Cosby, B.L. Lambert et al., Diagnostic error in medicine: analysis of 583 physician-reported errors, Arch Intern Med 169 (2009) 1881-1887; P. Croskerry, The importance of cognitive errors in diagnosis and strategies to minimize them, Acad Med 78 (2003) 775-780; H. Singh, A.N.D. Meyer, E.J. Thomas, The frequency of diagnostic errors in outpatient care, BMJ Qual Saf 23 (2014) 727-731; and M.L. Graber, N. Franklin, R. Gordon, Diagnostic error in internal medicine, Arch Intern Med 165 (2005) 1493-1499] to identify core distortion modes, develop domain definitions, item-level anchors, and scoring thresholds. We propose a multi-phase validation plan including content validity, inter-rater reliability, construct validity, criterion validity, and responsiveness.
Results: The PNDI taxonomy includes five domains: Narrative Completeness Distortion, Meaning Substitution Distortion, Salience Distortion, Context Stripping Distortion, and Bias-Driven Distortion [E.N. Chapman, A. Kaatz, M. Carnes, Physicians and implicit bias: how it affects clinical decision making, Acad Med 88 (2013) 354-360]. Each domain includes 0-3 severity anchors and real-world clinical examples. The total PNDI score ranges from 0-15, with interpretation bands for narrative integrity and safety risk. Encounter-level, unit-level, and organizational-level workflows for implementation are outlined. The five-domain PNDI taxonomy is shown in Figure 2.
Conclusions: PNDI operationalizes narrative integrity as a measurable dimension of diagnostic safety [The Joint Commission, National Patient Safety Goals: Improving Diagnosis in Health Care 2024-2026, The Joint Commission, Oakbrook Terrace, IL, 2024]. It provides clinicians, educators, and safety teams with a practical tool to detect narrative loss, reduce diagnostic error [G.D. Schiff, O. Hasan, S. Kim, R. Abrams, K. Cosby, B.L. Lambert et al., Diagnostic error in medicine: analysis of 583 physician-reported errors, Arch Intern Med 169 (2009) 1881-1887; P. Croskerry, The importance of cognitive errors in diagnosis and strategies to minimize them, Acad Med 78 (2003) 775-780; H. Singh, A.N.D. Meyer, E.J. Thomas, The frequency of diagnostic errors in outpatient care, BMJ Qual Saf 23 (2014) 727-731; and M.L. Graber, N. Franklin, R. Gordon, Diagnostic error in internal medicine, Arch Intern Med 165 (2005) 1493-1499], and strengthen patient trust [W. Levinson, D.L. Roter, J.P. Mullooly, V.T. Dull, R.M. Frankel, Physician-patient communication: the relationship with malpractice claims, JAMA 277 (1997) 553-559].
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