Literature DB >> 11073470

The cognitive imperative: thinking about how we think.

P Croskerry1.   

Abstract

There are three domains of expertise required for consistently effective performance in emergency medicine (EM): procedural, affective, and cognitive. Most of the activity is performed in the cognitive domain. Studies in the cognitive sciences have focused on a number of common and predictable biases in the thinking process, many of which are relevant to the practice of EM. It is important to understand these biases and how they might influence clinical decision-making behavior. Among the specialities, EM provides a unique clinical milieu of inconstancy, uncertainty, variety, and complexity. Injury and illness are seen within narrow time windows, often under pressured ambient conditions. These operating characteristics force practitioners to adopt a distinctive blend of thinking strategies. Principal among them is the use of heuristics, a form of abbreviated thinking that often leads to successful outcomes but that occasionally may result in error. A number of opportunities exist to overcome interdisciplinary, linguistic, and other historical obstacles to develop a sound approach to understanding how we think in EM. This will lead to a better awareness of our cognitive processes, an improved capacity to teach effectively about cognitive strategies, and, ultimately, the minimization or avoidance of clinical error.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11073470     DOI: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2000.tb00467.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acad Emerg Med        ISSN: 1069-6563            Impact factor:   3.451


  26 in total

1.  Analysis and validation of putative substances involved in fatal poisonings.

Authors:  Christopher K Hansen; John Kashani; Bruce Ruck; Steven Marcus
Journal:  J Med Toxicol       Date:  2012-06

2.  Assessing the use of cognitive heuristic representativeness in clinical reasoning.

Authors:  Velma L Payne; Rebecca S Crowley; Rebecca Crowley
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2008-11-06

3.  Patients are harmed (again), fingers point. What's wrong?

Authors:  W Ward Flemons; Jan M Davies
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2011-02-07       Impact factor: 8.262

4.  A CTSA agenda to advance methods for comparative effectiveness research.

Authors:  Mark Helfand; Sean Tunis; Evelyn P Whitlock; Stephen G Pauker; Anirban Basu; Jon Chilingerian; Frank E Harrell; David O Meltzer; Victor M Montori; Donald S Shepard; David M Kent
Journal:  Clin Transl Sci       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 4.689

Review 5.  Bias in Radiology: The How and Why of Misses and Misinterpretations.

Authors:  Lindsay P Busby; Jesse L Courtier; Christine M Glastonbury
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  2017-12-01       Impact factor: 5.333

6.  Errors of diagnosis in pediatric practice: a multisite survey.

Authors:  Hardeep Singh; Eric J Thomas; Lindsey Wilson; P Adam Kelly; Kenneth Pietz; Dena Elkeeb; Geeta Singhal
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2010-06-21       Impact factor: 7.124

7.  Adjusting our lens: can developmental differences in diagnostic reasoning be harnessed to improve health professional and trainee assessment?

Authors:  Jonathan S Ilgen; Judith L Bowen; Lalena M Yarris; Rongwei Fu; Robert A Lowe; Kevin Eva
Journal:  Acad Emerg Med       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 3.451

8.  Exploring situational awareness in diagnostic errors in primary care.

Authors:  Hardeep Singh; Traber Davis Giardina; Laura A Petersen; Michael W Smith; Lindsey Wilson Paul; Key Dismukes; Gayathri Bhagwath; Eric J Thomas
Journal:  BMJ Qual Saf       Date:  2011-09-02       Impact factor: 7.035

Review 9.  Understanding Decision Making in Critical Care.

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

10.  Insights into emergency physicians' minds in the seconds before and into a patient encounter.

Authors:  Thierry Pelaccia; Jacques Tardif; Emmanuel Triby; Christine Ammirati; Catherine Bertrand; Bernard Charlin; Valérie Dory
Journal:  Intern Emerg Med       Date:  2015-08-01       Impact factor: 3.397

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.