Reconsidering ambiguous language in infectious disease consult recommendations

Clicks: 4
ID: 319553
2026
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #425 of 532 articles by views in Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 532 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Abstract Background Infectious diseases (ID) consultations are associated with improved patient outcomes. We aimed to determine whether ambiguous language affects adherence to recommendations. Methods We conducted a retrospective study of consecutive ID consultations across four campuses of a 2,500 bed hospital network in 2024. Ambiguous language use was quantified and described. The relationship between ambiguous language and adherence to recommendations was assessed using univariable and multivariable mixed effects logistic regression, with consult episode as a random effect. Other predictors of ambiguous language and adherence were assessed and adjusted for, including referring unit, consulting team demographics, recommendation type and number of recommendations. Results 1087 recommendations were made across 250 consecutive consultations. Of these, 106/1087 (9.8%) used ambiguous language, most commonly the expression “consider”. Adherence was assessable in 977/1087 recommendations. Adherence to assessable non-ambiguous recommendations was 87.2% (725/903 [80.3%] completely followed, 62/903 [6.9%] partially followed), while adherence to ambiguous recommendations was 59.5% (38/74 [51.4%] totally followed, 6/74 [8.1%] partially followed, p <0.001). In multivariable analysis, recommendations containing ambiguous language were significantly less likely to be followed (adjusted OR 0.16, 95% CI 0.09-0.30, p < 0.001). Other significant predictors of adherence were therapeutic recommendation, and consultant seniority. There was no association between adherence and clinician gender, referring unit, or total number of recommendations. Use of ambiguous language was more frequent in recommendations that were not immediately actionable. Conclusion Ambiguous language in ID consults is frequent, and is associated with reduced adherence to recommendations.
Reference Key
openalex_W7167218044 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Mitchell J Browne, Ralph Junckerstorff, Allen Cheng, Claire Dendle, Aleece MacPhail
Journal Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/cid/ciag400
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciag400
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.