Sex-differences in human liver gene expression were characterized on a genome-wide scale using a large liver sample collection, allowing for detection of small expression differences with high statistical power. 1,249 sex-biased genes were identified, 70% showing higher expression in females. Chromosomal bias was apparent, with female-biased genes enriched on chrX and male-biased genes enriched on chrY and chr19, where 11 male-biased zinc-finger KRAB-repressor domain genes are distributed in six clusters. Top biological functions and diseases significantly enriched in sex-biased genes include transcription, chromatin organization and modification, sexual reproduction, lipid metabolism and cardiovascular disease. Notably, sex-biased genes are enriched at loci associated with polygenic dyslipidemia and coronary artery disease in genome-wide association studies. Moreover, of the 8 sex-biased genes at these loci, 4 have been directly linked to monogenic disorders of lipid metabolism and show an expression profile in females (elevated expression of ABCA1, APOA5 and LDLR; reduced expression of LIPC) that is consistent with the lower female risk of coronary artery disease. Female-biased expression was also observed for CYP7A1, which is activated by drugs used to treat hypercholesterolemia. Several sex-biased drug-metabolizing enzyme genes were identified, including members of the CYP, UGT, GPX and ALDH families. Half of 879 mouse orthologs, including many genes of lipid metabolism and homeostasis, show growth hormone-regulated sex-biased expression in mouse liver, suggesting growth hormone might play a similar regulatory role in human liver. Finally, the evolutionary rate of protein coding regions for human-mouse orthologs, revealed by dN/dS ratio, is significantly higher for genes showing the same sex-bias in both species than for non-sex-biased genes. These findings establish that human hepatic sex differences are widespread and affect diverse cell metabolic processes, and may help explain sex differences in lipid profiles associated with sex differential risk of coronary artery disease.

BackgroundMissed vascular events, infections, and cancers account for ~75% of serious harms from diagnostic errors. Just 15 diseases from these “Big Three” categories account for nearly half of all serious misdiagnosis-related harms in malpractice claims. As part of a larger project estimating total US burden of serious misdiagnosis-related harms, we performed a focused literature review to measure diagnostic error and harm rates for these 15 conditions.MethodsWe searched PubMed, Google, and cited references. For errors, we selected high-quality, modern, US-based studies, if available, and best available evidence otherwise. For harms, we used literature-based estimates of the generic (disease-agnostic) rate of serious harms (morbidity/mortality) per diagnostic error and applied claims-based severity weights to construct disease-specific rates. Results were validated via expert review and comparison to prior literature that used different methods. We used Monte Carlo analysis to construct probabilistic plausible ranges (PPRs) around estimates.ResultsRates for the 15 diseases were drawn from 28 published studies representing 91,755 patients. Diagnostic error (false negative) rates ranged from 2.2% (myocardial infarction) to 62.1% (spinal abscess), with a median of 13.6% [interquartile range (IQR) 9.2–24.7] and an aggregate mean of 9.7% (PPR 8.2–12.3). Serious misdiagnosis-related harm rates per incident disease case ranged from 1.2% (myocardial infarction) to 35.6% (spinal abscess), with a median of 5.5% (IQR 4.6–13.6) and an aggregate mean of 5.2% (PPR 4.5–6.7). Rates were considered face valid by domain experts and consistent with prior literature reports.ConclusionsDiagnostic improvement initiatives should focus on dangerous conditions with higher diagnostic error and misdiagnosis-related harm rates.

Background Diagnostic errors cause substantial preventable harm, but national estimates vary widely from 40,000 to 4 million annually. This cross-sectional analysis of a large medical malpractice claims database was the first phase of a three-phase project to estimate the US burden of serious misdiagnosis-related harms. Methods We sought to identify diseases accounting for the majority of serious misdiagnosis-related harms (morbidity/mortality). Diagnostic error cases were identified from Controlled Risk Insurance Company (CRICO)’s Comparative Benchmarking System (CBS) database (2006–2015), representing 28.7% of all US malpractice claims. Diseases were grouped according to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) Clinical Classifications Software (CCS) that aggregates the International Classification of Diseases diagnostic codes into clinically sensible groupings. We analyzed vascular events, infections, and cancers (the “Big Three”), including frequency, severity, and settings. High-severity (serious) harms were defined by scores of 6–9 (serious, permanent disability, or death) on the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) Severity of Injury Scale. Results From 55,377 closed claims, we analyzed 11,592 diagnostic error cases [median age 49, interquartile range (IQR) 36–60; 51.7% female]. These included 7379 with high-severity harms (53.0% death). The Big Three diseases accounted for 74.1% of high-severity cases (vascular events 22.8%, infections 13.5%, and cancers 37.8%). In aggregate, the top five from each category (n = 15 diseases) accounted for 47.1% of high-severity cases. The most frequent disease in each category, respectively, was stroke, sepsis, and lung cancer. Causes were disproportionately clinical judgment factors (85.7%) across categories (range 82.0–88.8%). Conclusions The Big Three diseases account for about three-fourths of serious misdiagnosis-related harms. Initial efforts to improve diagnosis should focus on vascular events, infections, and cancers.

This study confirms previous research hypothesizing that systematic regional variation in overuse exists and is measurable. Addition research is needed to validate index and to test its predictive and concurrent validity in panel data.

Embase 'accreditation'/exp/mj OR accreditation:ab,ti AND ('undergraduate medical education'/exp OR 'undergraduate medical education':ab,ti OR 'medical school'/exp/mj OR 'medical school':ab,ti OR 'medical schools':ab,ti) ([article]/lim OR [article in press]/lim OR [review]/lim) AND ([embase]/lim OR [embase classic]/lim) 282 57 ERIC (DE "Accreditation (Institutions)" OR accreditation) AND (DE "Medical Schools" OR "undergraduate medical education") Journal articles 36 0 PubMed (((("Accreditation"[mj] OR accreditation[tw]]))) AND (("Schools, Medical"[mj] OR "Education, Medical, Undergraduate"[Mj] OR "medical school"[tw] OR "medical schools"[tw] OR "undergraduate medical education"[tw]))))

Objectives. Diagnostic errors are a known patient safety concern across all clinical settings, including the emergency department (ED). We conducted a systematic review to determine the most frequent diseases and clinical presentations associated with diagnostic errors (and resulting harms) in the ED, measure error and harm frequency, as well as assess causal factors. Methods. We searched PubMed®, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL®), and Embase® from January 2000 through September 2021. We included research studies and targeted grey literature reporting diagnostic errors or misdiagnosis-related harms in EDs in the United States or other developed countries with ED care deemed comparable by a technical expert panel. We applied standard definitions for diagnostic errors, misdiagnosis-related harms (adverse events), and serious harms (permanent disability or death). Preventability was determined by original study authors or differences in harms across groups. Two reviewers independently screened search results for eligibility; serially extracted data regarding common diseases, error/harm rates, and causes/risk factors; and independently assessed risk of bias of included studies. We synthesized results for each question and extrapolated U.S. estimates. We present 95 percent confidence intervals (CIs) or plausible range (PR) bounds, as appropriate. Results. We identified 19,127 citations and included 279 studies. The top 15 clinical conditions associated with serious misdiagnosis-related harms (accounting for 68% [95% CI 66 to 71] of serious harms) were (1) stroke, (2) myocardial infarction, (3) aortic aneurysm and dissection, (4) spinal cord compression and injury, (5) venous thromboembolism, (6/7 – tie) meningitis and encephalitis, (6/7 – tie) sepsis, (8) lung cancer, (9) traumatic brain injury and traumatic intracranial hemorrhage, (10) arterial thromboembolism, (11) spinal and intracranial abscess, (12) cardiac arrhythmia, (13) pneumonia, (14) gastrointestinal perforation and rupture, and (15) intestinal obstruction. Average disease-specific error rates ranged from 1.5 percent (myocardial infarction) to 56 percent (spinal abscess), with additional variation by clinical presentation (e.g., missed stroke average 17%, but 4% for weakness and 40% for dizziness/vertigo). There was also wide, superimposed variation by hospital (e.g., missed myocardial infarction 0% to 29% across hospitals within a single study). An estimated 5.7 percent (95% CI 4.4 to 7.1) of all ED visits had at least one diagnostic error. Estimated preventable adverse event rates were as follows: any harm severity (2.0%, 95% CI 1.0 to 3.6), any serious harms (0.3%, PR 0.1 to 0.7), and deaths (0.2%, PR 0.1 to 0.4). While most disease-specific error rates derived from mainly U.S.-based studies, overall error and harm rates were derived from three prospective studies conducted outside the United States (in Canada, Spain, and Switzerland, with combined n=1,758). If overall rates are generalizable to all U.S. ED visits (130 million, 95% CI 116 to 144), this would translate to 7.4 million (PR 5.1 to 10.2) ED diagnostic errors annually; 2.6 million (PR 1.1 to 5.2) diagnostic adverse events with preventable harms; and 371,000 (PR 142,000 to 909,000) serious misdiagnosis-related harms, including more than 100,000 permanent, high-severity disabilities and 250,000 deaths. Although errors were often multifactorial, 89 percent (95% CI 88 to 90) of diagnostic error malpractice claims involved failures of clinical decision-making or judgment, regardless of the underlying disease present. Key process failures were errors in diagnostic assessment, test ordering, and test interpretation. Most often these were attributed to inadequate knowledge, skills, or reasoning, particularly in “atypical” or otherwise subtle case presentations. Limitations included use of malpractice claims and incident reports for distribution of diseases leading to serious harms, reliance on a small number of non-U.S. studies for overall (disease-agnostic) diagnostic error and harm rates, and methodologic variability across studies in measuring disease-specific rates, determining preventability, and assessing causal factors. Conclusions. Although estimated ED error rates are low (and comparable to those found in other clinical settings), the number of patients potentially impacted is large. Not all diagnostic errors or harms are preventable, but wide variability in diagnostic error rates across diseases, symptoms, and hospitals suggests improvement is possible. With 130 million U.S. ED visits, estimated rates for diagnostic error (5.7%), misdiagnosis-related harms (2.0%), and serious misdiagnosis-related harms (0.3%) could translate to more than 7 million errors, 2.5 million harms, and 350,000 patients suffering potentially preventable permanent disability or death. Over two-thirds of serious harms are attributable to just 15 diseases and linked to cognitive errors, particularly in cases with “atypical” manifestations. Scalable solutions to enhance bedside diagnostic processes are needed, and these should target the most commonly misdiagnosed clinical presentations of key diseases causing serious harms. New studies should confirm overall rates are representative of current U.S.-based ED practice and focus on identified evidence gaps (errors among common diseases with lower-severity harms, pediatric ED errors and harms, dynamic systems factors such as overcrowding, and false positives). Policy changes to consider based on this review include: (1) standardizing measurement and research results reporting to maximize comparability of measures of diagnostic error and misdiagnosis-related harms; (2) creating a National Diagnostic Performance Dashboard to track performance; and (3) using multiple policy levers (e.g., research funding, public accountability, payment reforms) to facilitate the rapid development and deployment of solutions to address this critically important patient safety concern.

Neuropathological and neuroimaging studies have consistently demonstrated degeneration of monoamine systems, especially the serotonin system, in normal aging and Alzheimer’s disease. The evidence for degeneration of the serotonin system in mild cognitive impairment is limited. Thus, the goal of the present study was to measure the serotonin transporter in vivo in mild cognitive impairment and healthy controls. The serotonin transporter is a selective marker of serotonin terminals and of the integrity of serotonin projections to cortical, subcortical and limbic regions, as well as the cell bodies of origin (raphe nuclei). Twenty-eight participants with mild cognitive impairment (age 66.6 ± 6.9, 16 males) and 28 healthy, cognitively normal, demographically matched controls (age 66.2 ± 7.1, 15 males) underwent magnetic resonance imaging for measurement of grey matter volumes and high-resolution positron emission tomography with well-established radiotracers for the serotonin transporter and regional cerebral blood flow. Beta-amyloid imaging was performed to describe, in combination with the neuropsychological testing, the likelihood of subsequent cognitive decline in the participants with mild cognitive impairment. The following hypotheses were tested: 1) the serotonin transporter would be lower in mild cognitive impairment compared to controls in cortical and limbic regions, 2) in mild cognitive impairment relative to controls, serotonin transporter would be lower to a greater extent and more widespread than lower grey matter volumes or regional cerebral blood flow and 3) lower cortical and limbic serotonin transporters would be correlated with greater deficits in auditory-verbal and visual-spatial memory in mild cognitive impairment, not in controls. Reduced serotonin transporter availability was observed in mild cognitive impairment compared to controls in cortical and limbic areas typically affected by Alzheimer’s disease pathology, as well as in sensory and motor areas, striatum and thalamus that are relatively spared in Alzheimer’s disease. The reduction of the serotonin transporter in mild cognitive impairment was greater than grey matter atrophy or reductions in regional cerebral blood flow compared to controls. Lower cortical serotonin transporters were associated with worse performance on tests of auditory-verbal and visual-spatial memory in mild cognitive impairment, not in controls. The serotonin system may represent an important target for prevention and treatment of MCI, particularly the post-synaptic receptors (5-HT4 and 5-HT6), which may not be as severely affected as presynaptic aspects of the serotonin system.

We identified a set of overused procedures that may be used as measures of overuse and that demonstrate significant variance in their usage. The implication is that an index of overuse might be built from these indicators that would reveal systematic patterns of overuse within regions. Alternatively, these indicators may be valuable in the quality improvement efforts.