Journal of Medical Systems

, 42:153 | Cite as

Medical Malpractice Trends: Errors in Automated Speech Recognition

  • Maxim TopazEmail author
  • Adam Schaffer
  • Kenneth H. Lai
  • Zfania Tom Korach
  • Jonathan Einbinder
  • Li Zhou
Systems-Level Quality Improvement
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Systems-Level Quality Improvement

Introduction and background

Automated speech recognition (SR) technology—defined as computer-assisted transcription of spoken language into readable text in real or near-real time—is becoming ubiquitous in everyday life. SR has been already integrated into many electronic devices (e.g., personal computers, mobile phones, smart homes) and is envisioned to revolutionize the way we interact with technology in the near future [1]. In medicine, SR was adopted early in several fields, such as radiology [2], but was not accepted uniformly across all clinical settings. Today however, with the widespread adoption of electronic health records, SR is becoming increasingly prevalent across many types of clinicians in multiple healthcare settings.

Previously, SR technologies in healthcare were adopted with caution because of safety concerns and the potential for errors. With the rapid proliferation of SR into different domains of healthcare, only a few studies have examined the safety and accuracy...



This study was funded by CRICO foundation.

Compliance with ethical standard

Conflict of interest

None reported.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors. This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of partners Healthcare, Boston, USA.


  1. 1.
    Bar, N., How voice technology is transforming computing. Econ 2017. (accessed 29 Aug 2017).
  2. 2.
    Herman, S., Speech recognition and the creation of radiology reports. Appl Radiol 33:23–28, 2004.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hodgson, T., and Coiera, E., Risks and benefits of speech recognition for clinical documentation: A systematic review. J Am Med Inform Assoc 23:e169–e179, 2016. e1.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Goss, F. R., Zhou, L., and Weiner, S. G., Incidence of speech recognition errors in the emergency department. Int J Med Inform 93:70–73, 2016. Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hodgson, T., Magrabi, F., Coiera, E., Efficiency and safety of speech recognition for documentation in the electronic health record. J Am Med Informatics Assoc 2017;Epub ahead of print.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Siegal, D., and Ruoff, G., Data as a catalyst for change: Stories from the frontlines. J Healthc Risk Manag 34(3):18–25, 2015. Scholar
  7. 7.
    McHugh, M. L., Interrater reliability: The kappa statistic. Biochem medica 2012;22:276–82. (accessed 27 Aug2017).
  8. 8.
    Localio, A. R., Lawthers, A. G., Brennan, T. A., Laird, N. M., Hebert, L. E., Peterson, L. M., Newhouse, J. P., Weiler, P. C., and Hiatt, H. H., Relation between malpractice claims and adverse events due to negligence. N Engl J Med 325(4):245–251, 1991. Scholar
  9. 9.
    Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Patient Safety Primer: Systems Approach. 2017. (accessed 29 Aug 2017).

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Cheryl Spencer Department of NursingUniversity of HaifaHaifaIsrael
  2. 2.Brigham and Women’s HospitalBostonUSA
  3. 3.Harvard Medical School & Brigham and Women’s HospitalBostonUSA
  4. 4.Harvard Medical SchoolBostonUSA
  5. 5.Partners HealthCare SystemBostonUSA
  6. 6.Department of Computer ScienceBrandeis UniversityWalthamUSA
  7. 7.Controlled Risk Insurance Company (CRICO)BostonUSA

Personalised recommendations