Literature DB >> 30877781

Experienced physician descriptions of intuition in clinical reasoning: a typology.

Meredith Vanstone1,2, Sandra Monteiro2,3, Eamon Colvin2, Geoff Norman2,3, Jonathan Sherbino2,4, Matthew Sibbald2,5, Kelly Dore2,4, Amanda Peters6.   

Abstract

Background Diagnostic intuition is a rapid, non-analytic, unconscious mode of reasoning. A small body of evidence points to the ubiquity of intuition, and its usefulness in generating diagnostic hypotheses and ascertaining severity of illness. Little is known about how experienced physicians understand this phenomenon, and how they work with it in clinical practice. Methods Descriptions of how experienced physicians perceive their use of diagnostic intuition in clinical practice were elicited through interviews conducted with 30 physicians in emergency, internal and family medicine. Each participant was asked to share stories of diagnostic intuition, including times when intuition was both correct and incorrect. Multiple coders conducted descriptive analysis to analyze the salient aspects of these stories. Results Physicians provided descriptions of what diagnostic intuition is, when it occurs and what type of activity it prompts. From stories of correct intuition, a typology of four different types of intuition was identified: Sick/Not Sick, Something Not Right, Frame-shifting and Abduction. Most physician accounts of diagnostic intuition linked this phenomenon to non-analytic reasoning and emphasized the importance of experience in developing a trustworthy sense of intuition that can be used to effectively engage analytic reasoning to evaluate clinical evidence. Conclusions The participants recounted myriad stories of diagnostic intuition that alerted them to unusual diagnoses, previous diagnostic error or deleterious trajectories. While this qualitative study can offer no conclusions about the representativeness of these stories, it suggests that physicians perceive clinical intuition as beneficial for correcting and advancing diagnoses of both common and rare conditions.

Entities:  

Keywords:  clinical reasoning; intuition; qualitative research

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30877781     DOI: 10.1515/dx-2018-0069

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Diagnosis (Berl)        ISSN: 2194-802X


  6 in total

1.  Assessing clinical reasoning in undergraduate medical students during history taking with an empirically derived scale for clinical reasoning indicators.

Authors:  Sophie Fürstenberg; Tillmann Helm; Sarah Prediger; Martina Kadmon; Pascal O Berberat; Sigrid Harendza
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2020-10-19       Impact factor: 2.463

2.  Prediction of hospitalization using artificial intelligence for urgent patients in the emergency department.

Authors:  Jung-Ting Lee; Chih-Chia Hsieh; Chih-Hao Lin; Yu-Jen Lin; Chung-Yao Kao
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-09-30       Impact factor: 4.379

3.  The Influence of Saudi National COVID-19 Preparedness Programs on Triage Decision-Making Skills of Healthcare Practitioners During the 2020 Peak of the 1st Wave of COVID-19.

Authors:  Faisal Rashed Alzahrani; Modi Al-Moteri
Journal:  Infect Drug Resist       Date:  2022-03-08       Impact factor: 4.003

4.  Perspectives of Triage Team Members Participating in Statewide Triage Simulations for Scarce Resource Allocation During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Washington State.

Authors:  Catherine R Butler; Laura B Webster; Douglas S Diekema; Megan M Gray; Vicki L Sakata; Mark R Tonelli; Kelly C Vranas
Journal:  JAMA Netw Open       Date:  2022-04-01

5.  Digital health understanding and preparedness of medical students: a cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Martin Baumgartner; Christoph Sauer; Kathrin Blagec; Georg Dorffner
Journal:  Med Educ Online       Date:  2022-12

6.  Understanding the role of GPs' gut feelings in diagnosing cancer in primary care: a systematic review and meta-analysis of existing evidence.

Authors:  Claire Friedemann Smith; Sarah Drew; Sue Ziebland; Brian D Nicholson
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2020-08-27       Impact factor: 5.386

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.