Heuristics and medical errors. Part 2: How to make better medical decisions

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription Access

Abstract

This publication is a continuation of the article published in the 4th issue of the journal Russian family doctor for 2020 “Heuristics, language and medical errors”, which described the ways of making medical decisions that can lead to errors in patient management tactics, in particular “affect of heuristics / visceral bias”, “attribution error”, “frame of reference”, “availability bias”, “one-word-one-meaning-fallacy”. This article discusses additional sources of diagnostic error, including “diagnosis momentum”, “confirmation bias”, “representativeness”, and “premature closure” also the conflict that arises from diagnostic uncertainty is discussed. All errors in the tactics and the diagnostic process are illustrated by clinical cases from the personal practice of the author of the article.

About the authors

Mark A. Graber

University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine

Author for correspondence.
Email: mark-graber@uiowa.edu

MD MSHCE FACEP, Emeritus Professor of Emergency and Family Medicine

United States, University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine, 451 Newton Road, 200 Medicine Administration Building, Iowa City, IA 52242

References

  1. Graber MA. Heuristics, language and medical errors. Russian Family Doctor. 2020;24(4):25–30. doi: 10.17816/RFD50991
  2. Howard J. Premature closure: anchoring bias, occam’s error, availability bias, search satisficing, yin-yang error, diagnosis momentum, triage cueing, and unpacking failure. In: Cognitive Errors and Diagnostic Mistakes. Springer; 2019. P. 379–423. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-93224-8_23
  3. Crosskerry P. Cognitive and affective biases in medicine [Internet]. Critical Thinking Program. Canada. 2013. Available from: http://sjrhem.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/CriticaThinking-Listof50-biases.pdf. Accessed 19.01.2021.
  4. Sterbenz C. 12 Famous Quotes That Always Get Misattributed [Internet]. 2013. Available from: https://www.businessinsider.com/misattributed-quotes-2013-10. Accessed 19.01.2021.
  5. Nickerson RS. Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology. 1998;2(2):175–220. doi: 10.1037/1089-2680.2.2.175
  6. Mendel R, Traut-Mattausch E, Jonas E, et al. Confirmation bias: why psychiatrists stick to wrong preliminary diagnoses. Psychol Med. 2011;41(12):2651–2659. doi: 10.1017/S0033291711000808
  7. Pines JM. Profiles in patient safety: Confirmation bias in emergency medicine. Acad Emerg Med. 2006;13(1):90–94. doi: 10.1197/j.aem.2005.07.028
  8. Ely JW, Graber MA. Checklists to prevent diagnostic errors: a pilot randomized controlled trial. Diagnosis (Berl). 2015;2(3):163–169. doi: 10.1515/dx-2015-0008
  9. Penaloza A, Soulié C, Moumneh T, et. al. Pulmonary embolism rule-out criteria (PERC) rule in European patients with low implicit clinical probability (PERCEPIC): a multicentre, prospective, observational study. Lancet Haematol. 2017;4(12):e615–e621. doi: 10.1016/S2352-3026(17)30210-7
  10. Freund Y, Cachanado M, Aubry A, et. al. Effect of the pulmonary embolism rule-out criteria on subsequent thromboembolic events among low-risk emergency department patients: The PROPER randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2018;319(6):559–566. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.21904
  11. Tversky A, Kahneman D. Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science. 1974;185(4157):1124–1131. doi: 10.1126/science.185.4157.1124
  12. Kulkarni SS, Dewitt B, Fischhoff B, et al. Defining the representativeness heuristic in trauma triage: A retrospective observational cohort study. PLoS One. 2019;14(2):e0212201. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0212201
  13. Representativeness heuristic [Internet] // Behavioral Economics. Available from: https://www.behavioraleconomics.com/resources/mini-encyclopedia-of-be/representativeness-heuristic. Accessed 19.01.2021.
  14. Wilcox ME, Chong CAKY, Stanbrook MB, et. al. Does this patient have an exudative pleural effusion? The rational clinical examination systematic review. JAMA. 2014;311(23):2422–2431. doi: 10.1001/jama.2014.5552
  15. Porcel JM, Light RW. Diagnostic approach to pleural effusion in adults. Am Fam Physician. 2006;73(7):1211–1220.
  16. Gu Y, Gu S, Lei Y, Li H. From uncertainty to anxiety: How uncertainty fuels anxiety in a process mediated by intolerance of uncertainty. Neural Plast. 2020:8866386. doi: 10.1155/2020/8866386
  17. Malterud K, Guassora AD, Reventlow S, et. al. Embracing uncertainty to advance diagnosis in general practice. Br J Gen Pract. 2017;67(659):244–245. doi: 10.3399/bjgp17X690941
  18. Russek NS, Detsky AS, Quinn K.L. Managing clinical uncertainty a teachable moment. JAMA Intern Med. 2020;180(3):452–453. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2019.6700
  19. Armstrong K. If you can’t beat it, join it: Uncertainty and trust in medicine. Ann Intern Med. 2018;168(11):818–819. doi: 10.7326/M18-0445

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML

Copyright (c) 2021 Graber M.A.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
 


Согласие на обработку персональных данных

 

Используя сайт https://journals.rcsi.science, я (далее – «Пользователь» или «Субъект персональных данных») даю согласие на обработку персональных данных на этом сайте (текст Согласия) и на обработку персональных данных с помощью сервиса «Яндекс.Метрика» (текст Согласия).