The literature on diagnostic overshadowing itself is relatively contained. Systematic reviews and concept analyses have identified 25–50 core publications directly addressing the phenomenon [1][2][3]. However, when broader related terms—diagnostic error, clinical bias, healthcare disparities—are included in database searches, results expand to 1,500–3,000 mentions across PubMed and Google Scholar. The key insight is that while the general concept is recognized, implementation-focused work remains sparse. Setting-specific research (emergency departments, nursing homes, primary care) and practical solutions (medical scribe protocols, wearable-data patient advocacy, AI-assisted triage) number fewer than 50–100 papers each. This confirms the previous recommendation: narrowing to a specific setting or concrete intervention paired with patient voice or measurable outcomes positions your work in genuinely underexplored territory with high novelty potential.