Literature DB >> 10429587

Heuristics and biases: selected errors in clinical reasoning.

A S Elstein1.   

Abstract

Many clinical decisions are made in uncertainty. When the diagnosis is uncertain, the goal is to establish a diagnosis or to treat even if the diagnosis remains unknown. If the diagnosis is known (e.g., breast cancer or prostate cancer) but the treatment is risky and its outcome uncertain, still a choice must be made. In researching the psychology of clinical judgment and decision making, the major strategy is to compare observed clinical judgments and decisions with the normative model established by statistical decision theory. In this framework, the process of diagnosing is conceptualized as using imperfect information to revise opinions; Bayes' theorem is the formal rule for updating a diagnosis as new data are available. Treatment decisions should be made so as to maximize expected value. This essay uses Bayes' theorem and concepts from decision theory to describe and explain some well-documented errors in clinical reasoning. Heuristics and biases are the cognitive factors that produce these errors.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10429587     DOI: 10.1097/00001888-199907000-00012

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acad Med        ISSN: 1040-2446            Impact factor:   6.893


  55 in total

Review 1.  Evaluation of diagnostic procedures.

Authors:  J André Knottnerus; Chris van Weel; Jean W M Muris
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2002-02-23

Review 2.  Clinical problem solving and diagnostic decision making: selective review of the cognitive literature.

Authors:  Arthur S Elstein; Alan Schwartz; Alan Schwarz
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2002-03-23

Review 3.  Predictive and prognostic models in radical prostatectomy candidates: a critical analysis of the literature.

Authors:  Giovanni Lughezzani; Alberto Briganti; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Michael W Kattan; Francesco Montorsi; Shahrokh F Shariat; Andrew J Vickers
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2010-08-06       Impact factor: 20.096

Review 4.  Variable performance of weaning-predictor tests: role of Bayes' theorem and spectrum and test-referral bias.

Authors:  Martin J Tobin; Amal Jubran
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2006-11-08       Impact factor: 17.440

5.  Using biopsy to detect prostate cancer.

Authors:  Shahrokh F Shariat; Claus G Roehrborn
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2008

6.  Can cognitive biases during consumer health information searches be reduced to improve decision making?

Authors:  Annie Y S Lau; Enrico W Coiera
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2008-10-24       Impact factor: 4.497

7.  What do physicians gain (and lose) with experience? Qualitative results from a cross-national study of diabetes.

Authors:  Emily A Elstad; Karen E Lutfey; Lisa D Marceau; Stephen M Campbell; Olaf von dem Knesebeck; John B McKinlay
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2010-03-10       Impact factor: 4.634

8.  Reducing diagnostic errors through effective communication: harnessing the power of information technology.

Authors:  Hardeep Singh; Aanand Dinkar Naik; Raghuram Rao; Laura Ann Petersen
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 5.128

Review 9.  Understanding Decision Making in Critical Care.

Authors:  Geoffrey K Lighthall; Cristina Vazquez-Guillamet
Journal:  Clin Med Res       Date:  2015-09-20

Review 10.  Critical review of prostate cancer predictive tools.

Authors:  Shahrokh F Shariat; Michael W Kattan; Andrew J Vickers; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Peter T Scardino
Journal:  Future Oncol       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 3.404

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.