Create Account | Sign In: Author or Forum

Search Symptoms

Category: Cardiology | Dermatology | Endocrinology | Family Medicine | Geriatrics | Gastroenterology | Gynecology | Infections | AIDS | Internal Medicine | Allergy | Critical Care | Emergency Medicine | Medical Students | Nephrology | Neurology | Oncology | Ophthalmology | Orthopedics | ENT | Pathology | Pediatrics | Psychiatry | Pulmonology | Radiology | Rheumatology | Surgery | Anesthesiology & Pain | Urology | Journal

Back to Journal Articles

Collaboration Between Med Students Cuts Diagnostic Errors

Last Updated: January 20, 2015.

For fourth-year medical students, working collaboratively is associated with a reduction in diagnostic errors, according to a research letter published in the Jan. 20 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association.

TUESDAY, Jan. 20, 2015 (HealthDay News) -- For fourth-year medical students, working collaboratively is associated with a reduction in diagnostic errors, according to a research letter published in the Jan. 20 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association.

Wolf E. Hautz, M.D., from the Charité Campus Mitte and Campus Virchow Klinikum in Berlin, and colleagues examined the effect of working in pairs versus working alone on diagnostic performance among a sample of fourth-year medical students. Participants assessed six cases of respiratory distress on a computer, which had been previously validated. Eighty-eight participants were randomly allocated to work either individually (28 students) or in pairs (60 students).

The researchers found that, despite having comparable knowledge about the topic and selecting an equal number of diagnostic tests, pairs were more accurate than individuals (67.78 versus 50.00 percent; P = 0.004). On average, pairs selected more relevant tests, but did so only when incorrect. Compared with individuals, pairs took 2.02 minutes longer to reach a diagnosis, but the selected tests would have taken 6.15 minutes less in reality. Confidence was higher among pairs, but their confidence was not better calibrated (difference between correct and incorrect cases was the same). Confidence between participants within pairs differed more when diagnosis was incorrect versus correct (P = 0.02).

"Working collaboratively reduced diagnostic errors among medical students," the authors write. "Similar to other studies, collaboration may have helped correct errors, fill knowledge gaps, and counteract reasoning flaws."

One author disclosed financial ties to the pharmaceutical industry.

Full Text (subscription or payment may be required)


Previous: Ablation Effectiveness Quotient Predicts Clinical Success Next: Therapy Dogs May Help Patients Persevere With Cancer Treatment

Reader comments on this article are listed below. Review our comments policy.


Submit your opinion: