Varied mammogram readings worry researchers

Errors in cancer diagnosis: current understanding and future directions

PURPOSE

Errors in cancer diagnosis are likely the most harmful and expensive types of diagnostic errors. We reviewed the literature to understand the prevalence, origins, and prevention of errors in cancer diagnosis, focusing on common cancers for which early diagnosis offers clear benefit (melanoma and cancers of the breast, colon, and lung).

METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Library and PubMed from 1966 until April 2007 for publications that met our review criteria and manually searched references of key publications. Our search yielded 110 studies, of which nine were prospective studies and the remaining were retrospective studies.

RESULTS

Errors in cancer diagnosis were not uncommon in autopsy studies and were associated with significant harm and expense in malpractice claims. Literature on prevalence was scant. For each type of cancer, we classified preventable errors according to their origins in patient-physician encounters in the clinic setting, diagnostic test or procedure performance, pathologic confirmation of diagnosis, follow-up of patient or test result, or patient-related delays.

CONCLUSION

The literature reflects advanced knowledge of contributory factors and prevention for diagnostic errors related to the performance of procedures and imaging tests and emerging understanding of pathology errors. However, prospective studies are few, as are studies of diagnostic errors arising from the clinical encounter and patient follow-up. Future research should examine further the system and cognitive problems that lead to the many contributory factors we identified, and address interdisciplinary interventions to prevent errors in cancer diagnosis.

Bias in the Medical Journals: A Commentary

Most readers are not aware of the fact that medical journals may have an unspoken bias in the papers that they select for publication. These biases can have far-reaching consequences. The controversy over mammography screening for women ages 40-49 is a case in point. Several medical journals knowingly have refused to provide women with accurate information. Consequently, women have been led to believe that the age of 50 has some real significance with regard to screening when the fact is that it has none.