Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2024 Mar 27;9(1):18.
doi: 10.1186/s41235-024-00537-x.

Inattentional blindness in medicine

Affiliations
Review

Inattentional blindness in medicine

Connor M Hults et al. Cogn Res Princ Implic. .

Abstract

People often fail to notice unexpected stimuli when their attention is directed elsewhere. Most studies of this "inattentional blindness" have been conducted using laboratory tasks with little connection to real-world performance. Medical case reports document examples of missed findings in radiographs and CT images, unintentionally retained guidewires following surgery, and additional conditions being overlooked after making initial diagnoses. These cases suggest that inattentional blindness might contribute to medical errors, but relatively few studies have directly examined inattentional blindness in realistic medical contexts. We review the existing literature, much of which focuses on the use of augmented reality aids or inspection of medical images. Although these studies suggest a role for inattentional blindness in errors, most of the studies do not provide clear evidence that these errors result from inattentional blindness as opposed to other mechanisms. We discuss the design, analysis, and reporting practices that can make the contributions of inattentional blindness unclear, and we describe guidelines for future research in medicine and similar contexts that could provide clearer evidence for the role of inattentional blindness.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Documentation of our search and exclusion process

References

    1. Adamo SH, Cain MS, Mitroff SR. An individual differences approach to multiple-target visual search errors: How search errors relate to different characteristics of attention. Vision Research. 2017;141:258–265. doi: 10.1016/j.visres.2016.10.010. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Adamo SH, Gereke BJ, Shomstein S, Schmidt J. From “satisfaction of search” to “subsequent search misses”: A review of multiple-target search errors across radiology and cognitive science. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications. 2021;6:1–19. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Alexander AL, Wickens CD, Hardy TJ. Synthetic vision systems: The effects of guidance symbology, display size, and field of view. Human Factors. 2005;47(4):693–707. doi: 10.1518/001872005775571005. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Al-Moteri MO, Symmons M, Cooper S, Plummer V. Inattentional blindness and pattern-matching failure: The case of failure to recognize clinical cues. Applied Ergonomics. 2018;73:174–182. doi: 10.1016/j.apergo.2018.07.001. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ann-Christin S, Aleksander C, Peter W. More than meets the eye: Inattentional blindness. International Journal of Radiology and Imaging Technology. 2018 doi: 10.23937/2572-3235.1510037. - DOI

LinkOut - more resources