Literature DB >> 12414468

Achieving quality in clinical decision making: cognitive strategies and detection of bias.

Pat Croskerry1.   

Abstract

Clinical decision making is a cornerstone of high-quality care in emergency medicine. The density of decision making is unusually high in this unique milieu, and a combination of strategies has necessarily evolved to manage the load. In addition to the traditional hypothetico-deductive method, emergency physicians use several other approaches, principal among which are heuristics. These cognitive short-cutting strategies are especially adaptive under the time and resource limitations that prevail in many emergency departments (EDs), but occasionally they fail. When they do, we refer to them as cognitive errors. They are costly but highly preventable. It is important that emergency physicians be aware of the nature and extent of these heuristics and biases, or cognitive dispositions to respond (CDRs). Thirty are catalogued in this article, together with descriptions of their properties as well as the impact they have on clinical decision making in the ED. Strategies are delineated in each case, to minimize their occurrence. Detection and recognition of these cognitive phenomena are a first step in achieving cognitive de-biasing to improve clinical decision making in the ED.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12414468     DOI: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2002.tb01574.x

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


  135 in total

Review 1.  How clinical decisions are made.

Authors:  Louise Bate; Andrew Hutchinson; Jonathan Underhill; Neal Maskrey
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 4.335

2.  Diagnostic Scheming.

Authors:  Marlene Martin; Reza Sedighi Manesh; Mark C Henderson; Jeffrey M Critchfield
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2015-08-26       Impact factor: 5.128

3.  Workplace-Based Assessment of Internal Medicine Resident Diagnostic Accuracy.

Authors:  Michael D Jain; George A Tomlinson; Danica Lam; Jessica Liu; Deepti Damaraju; Allan S Detsky; Luke A Devine
Journal:  J Grad Med Educ       Date:  2014-09

4.  Generalizability of evidence-based assessment recommendations for pediatric bipolar disorder.

Authors:  Melissa M Jenkins; Eric A Youngstrom; Jennifer Kogos Youngstrom; Norah C Feeny; Robert L Findling
Journal:  Psychol Assess       Date:  2011-10-17

5.  Understanding diagnostic errors in medicine: a lesson from aviation.

Authors:  H Singh; L A Petersen; E J Thomas
Journal:  Qual Saf Health Care       Date:  2006-06

6.  Linking surveillance to action: incorporation of real-time regional data into a medical decision rule.

Authors:  Andrew M Fine; Lise E Nigrovic; Ben Y Reis; E Francis Cook; Kenneth D Mandl
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2007-01-09       Impact factor: 4.497

7.  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

Review 8.  Understanding Decision Making in Critical Care.

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

9.  Discussing Conservative Management With Older Patients With CKD: An Interview Study of Nephrologists.

Authors:  Keren Ladin; Renuka Pandya; Allison Kannam; Rohini Loke; Tira Oskoui; Ronald D Perrone; Klemens B Meyer; Daniel E Weiner; John B Wong
Journal:  Am J Kidney Dis       Date:  2018-02-01       Impact factor: 8.860

10.  Physician Bayesian updating from personal beliefs about the base rate and likelihood ratio.

Authors:  Benjamin Margolin Rottman
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2017-02
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.