Clinical reasoning research priorities for advancing diagnostic safety: researcher and patient perspectives

OBJECTIVES: This study used both researcher and patient perspectives to identify high-priority research questions related to clinical reasoning. METHODS: This study integrates findings from two previously published research prioritization exercises aimed at advancing the science of diagnostic safety, focusing on questions relevant to clinical reasoning. In Study 1 (April 2019), 97 researchers submitted 177 unique research questions that could be useful "to reduce patient harm in the diagnosis process". In Study 2 (November 2019), 41 patients/caregivers/advocates submitted 84 unique research questions on the same topic. In an in-person meeting, a subset of these participants identified 81 of these questions as high-priority (51 from Study 1; 30 from Study 2). For the current study, five investigators identified questions that focused on clinical reasoning, first independently and then by consensus. They then categorized the clinical reasoning questions into inductively identified themes. RESULTS: Twenty-nine of the 81 high-priority research questions addressed clinical reasoning and were categorized into 5 themes: understanding clinical reasoning and cognition (12 questions), decision support/technology (6 questions), team-based decision making (5 questions), how to learn from cases/scenarios (3 questions), and patient engagement (3 questions). Questions addressed a range of basic/foundational science and clinical applications, and involved individuals, teams, and/or systems. CONCLUSIONS: Identification of high-priority clinical reasoning research questions can help medical educators, clinicians, researchers, and funders catalyze research and discovery of interventions to improve clinical reasoning and ultimately improve patient outcomes.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Diagnosis
Published
2026-07-30
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1515/dx-2026-0018
Primary Topic
Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Clinical reasoning research priorities for advancing diagnostic safety: researcher and patient perspectives

Andrew P. J. Olson, Roni Matin, Laura Zwaan, Ashley N. D. Meyer et al.
Diagnosis
Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
article

Clinical reasoning research priorities for advancing diagnostic safety: researcher and patient perspectives

Andrew P. J. Olson, Roni Matin, Laura Zwaan, Ashley N. D. Meyer, Hardeep Singh, David A. Cook
article en

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This study used both researcher and patient perspectives to identify high-priority research questions related to clinical reasoning. METHODS: This study integrates findings from two previously published research prioritization exercises aimed at advancing the science of diagnostic safety, focusing on questions relevant to clinical reasoning. In Study 1 (April 2019), 97 researchers submitted 177 unique research questions that could be useful "to reduce patient harm in the diagnosis process". In Study 2 (November 2019), 41 patients/caregivers/advocates submitted 84 unique research questions on the same topic. In an in-person meeting, a subset of these participants identified 81 of these questions as high-priority (51 from Study 1; 30 from Study 2). For the current study, five investigators identified questions that focused on clinical reasoning, first independently and then by consensus. They then categorized the clinical reasoning questions into inductively identified themes. RESULTS: Twenty-nine of the 81 high-priority research questions addressed clinical reasoning and were categorized into 5 themes: understanding clinical reasoning and cognition (12 questions), decision support/technology (6 questions), team-based decision making (5 questions), how to learn from cases/scenarios (3 questions), and patient engagement (3 questions). Questions addressed a range of basic/foundational science and clinical applications, and involved individuals, teams, and/or systems. CONCLUSIONS: Identification of high-priority clinical reasoning research questions can help medical educators, clinicians, researchers, and funders catalyze research and discovery of interventions to improve clinical reasoning and ultimately improve patient outcomes.

Diagnosis
Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center (US), Mayo Clinic (US), Erasmus MC (NL), Mayo Clinic in Arizona (US), University of Minnesota Medical Center (US), Mayo Clinic in Florida (US), Erasmus MC Cancer Institute (NL), Erasmus University Rotterdam (NL)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.