The effect of prior experience on diagnostic reasoning: exploration of availability bias

Author:

Monteiro Sandra12ORCID,Sherbino Jonathan23,Ilgen Jonathan S.45,Hayden Emily M.6,Howey Elizabeth2,Norman Geoff12

Affiliation:

1. Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact , McMaster University , Hamilton , ON , Canada

2. McMaster Faculty of Health Sciences Education Research, Innovation and Theory (MERIT) Program , McMaster University , Hamilton , ON , Canada

3. Division of Emergency Medicine, Department of Medicine , McMaster University , Hamilton , ON , Canada

4. Department of Emergency Medicine , University of Washington , Seattle , WA , USA

5. Center for Leadership & Innovation in Medical Education , University of Washington , Seattle , WA , USA

6. Department of Emergency Medicine , Massachusetts General Hospital , Boston , MA , USA

Abstract

Abstract Objectives Diagnostic reasoning has been shown to be influenced by a prior similar patient case. However, it is unclear whether this process influences diagnostic error rates or whether clinicians at all experience levels are equally susceptible. The present study measured the influence of specific prior exposure and experience level on diagnostic accuracy. Methods To create the experience of prior exposure, participants (pre-clerkship medical students, emergency medicine residents, and faculty) first verified diagnoses of clinical vignettes. The influence of prior exposures was measured using equiprobable clinical vignettes; indicating two diagnoses. Participants diagnosed equiprobable cases that were: 1) matched to exposure cases (in one of three conditions: a) similar patient features, similar clinical features; b) dissimilar patient features, similar clinical features; c) similar patient features, dissimilar clinical features), or 2) not matched to any prior case (d) no exposure). A diagnosis consistent with a matched exposure case was scored correct. Cases with no prior exposure had no matched cases, hence validated the equiprobable design. Results Diagnosis A represented 47% of responses in condition d, but there was no influence of specific similarity of patient characteristics for Diagnosis A, F(3,712)=7.28, p=0.28 or Diagnosis B, F(3,712)=4.87, p=0.19. When re-scored based on matching both equiprobable diagnoses, accuracy was high, but favored faculty (n=40) 98%, and residents (n=39) 98% over medical students (n=32) 85%, F(2,712)=35.6, p<0.0001. Accuracy for medical students was 84, 87, 94, and 73% for conditions a–d, respectively, interaction F(2,712)=3.55, p<0.002. Conclusions The differential diagnosis of pre-clerkship medical students improved with prior exposure, but this was unrelated to specific case or patient features. The accuracy of medical residents and staff was not influenced by prior exposure.

Funder

Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada

Publisher

Walter de Gruyter GmbH

Subject

Biochemistry (medical),Clinical Biochemistry,Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,Health Policy,Medicine (miscellaneous)

Reference33 articles.

1. Elstein, AS, Schwarz, A. Clinical problem solving and diagnostic decision making: selective review of the cognitive literature. BMJ 2002;324:729–32. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.333.7575.944-c.

2. Gruppen, LD, Palchik, NS, Wolf, FM, Laing, TJ, Oh, MS, Davis, WK. Medical student use of history and physical information in diagnostic reasoning. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 1993;6:64–70. https://doi.org/10.1002/art.1790060204.

3. Gruppen, LD, Woolliscroft, JO, Wolf, FM, editors. The contribution of different components of the clinical encounter in generating and eliminating diagnostic hypotheses. Conference on research in medical education; 1988.

4. Barrows, HS, Norman, GR, Neufeld, VR, Feightner, JW. The clinical reasoning of randomly selected physicians in general medical practice. Clin Invest Med 1982;5:49–56.

5. Bordage, G, Lemieux, M. Semantic structures and diagnostic thinking of experts and novices. Acad Med 1991;66:S70–2. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-199109001-00025.

Cited by 4 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3