Literature DB >> 18999140

Assessing the use of cognitive heuristic representativeness in clinical reasoning.

Velma L Payne1, Rebecca S Crowley, Rebecca Crowley.   

Abstract

We performed a pilot study to investigate use of the cognitive heuristic Representativeness in clinical reasoning. We tested a set of tasks and assessments to determine whether subjects used the heuristics in reasoning, to obtain initial frequencies of heuristic use and related cognitive errors, and to collect cognitive process data using think-aloud techniques. The study investigates two aspects of the Representativeness heuristic - judging by perceived frequency and representativeness as causal beliefs. Results show that subjects apply both aspects of the heuristic during reasoning, and make errors related to misapplication of these heuristics. Subjects in this study rarely used base rates, showed significant variability in their recall of base rates, demonstrated limited ability to use provided base rates, and favored causal data in diagnosis. We conclude that the tasks and assessments we have developed provide a suitable test-bed to study the cognitive processes underlying heuristic errors.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18999140      PMCID: PMC2656076     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc        ISSN: 1559-4076


  6 in total

Review 1.  The potential for improved teamwork to reduce medical errors in the emergency department. The MedTeams Research Consortium.

Authors:  D T Risser; M M Rice; M L Salisbury; R Simon; G D Jay; S D Berns
Journal:  Ann Emerg Med       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 5.721

Review 2.  The cognitive imperative: thinking about how we think.

Authors:  P Croskerry
Journal:  Acad Emerg Med       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 3.451

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

Authors:  Pat Croskerry
Journal:  Acad Emerg Med       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 3.451

4.  Cognitive forcing strategies in clinical decisionmaking.

Authors:  Pat Croskerry
Journal:  Ann Emerg Med       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 5.721

5.  Interpretation by physicians of clinical laboratory results.

Authors:  W Casscells; A Schoenberger; T B Graboys
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1978-11-02       Impact factor: 91.245

6.  Physician's use of probabilistic information in a real clinical setting.

Authors:  J J Christensen-Szalanski; J B Bushyhead
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  1981-08       Impact factor: 3.332

  6 in total
  4 in total

1.  It is time to talk about people: a human-centered healthcare system.

Authors:  Meghan M Searl; Lea Borgi; Zeina Chemali
Journal:  Health Res Policy Syst       Date:  2010-11-26

2.  Automated detection of heuristics and biases among pathologists in a computer-based system.

Authors:  Rebecca S Crowley; Elizabeth Legowski; Olga Medvedeva; Kayse Reitmeyer; Eugene Tseytlin; Melissa Castine; Drazen Jukic; Claudia Mello-Thoms
Journal:  Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract       Date:  2012-05-23       Impact factor: 3.853

3.  You Only Find What You Look for: Anchor Bias During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Authors:  Mohammed A Abu-Rumaileh; Nada M Alsharif; Mohammad Abdulelah; Samuel Mueting; Husam Bader
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2021-06-03

4.  How much diagnostic safety can we afford, and how should we decide? A health economics perspective.

Authors:  David E Newman-Toker; Kathryn M McDonald; David O Meltzer
Journal:  BMJ Qual Saf       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 7.035

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.