Unraveling clinical reasoning and diagnostic error:Mechanisms and interventions

Much still remains unknown on the causes of diagnostic errors. This thesis examines possible cognitive causes of diagnostic errors in the diagnostic reasoning process of clinicians and possible ways to prevent diagnostic errors

Unraveling clinical reasoning and diagnostic error:Mechanisms and interventions

Much still remains unknown on the causes of diagnostic errors. This thesis examines possible cognitive causes of diagnostic errors in the diagnostic reasoning process of clinicians and possible ways to prevent diagnostic errors

Specific Disease Knowledge as Predictor of Susceptibility to Availability Bias in Diagnostic Reasoning:a Randomized Controlled Experiment

BACKGROUND: Bias in reasoning rather than knowledge gaps has been identified as the origin of most diagnostic errors. However, the role of knowledge in counteracting bias is unclear. OBJECTIVE: To examine whether knowledge of discriminating features (findings that discriminate between look-alike diseases) predicts susceptibility to bias. DESIGN: Three-phase randomized experiment. Phase 1 (bias-inducing): Participants were exposed to a set of clinical cases (either hepatitis-IBD or AMI-encephalopathy). Phase 2 (diagnosis): All participants diagnosed the same cases; 4 resembled hepatitis-IBD, 4 AMI-encephalopathy (but all with different diagnoses). Availability bias was expected in the 4 cases similar to those encountered in phase 1. Phase 3 (knowledge evaluation): For each disease, participants decided (max. 2 s) which of 24 findings was associated with the disease. Accuracy of decisions on discriminating features, taken as a measure of knowledge, was expected to predict susceptibility to bias. PARTICIPANTS: Internal medicine residents at Erasmus MC, Netherlands. MAIN MEASURES: The frequency with which higher-knowledge and lower-knowledge physicians gave biased diagnoses based on phase 1 exposure (range 0-4). Time to diagnose was also measured. KEY RESULTS: Sixty-two physicians participated. Higher-knowledge physicians yielded to availability bias less often than lower-knowledge physicians (0.35 vs 0.97; p = 0.001; difference, 0.62 [95% CI, 0.28-0.95]). Whereas lower-knowledge physicians tended to make more of these errors on subjected-to-bias than on not-subjected-to-bias cases (p = 0.06; difference, 0.35 [CI, - 0.02-0.73]), higher-knowledge physicians resisted the bias (p = 0.28). Both groups spent more time to diagnose subjected-to-bias than not-subjected-to-bias cases (p = 0.04), without differences between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Knowledge of features that discriminate between look-alike diseases reduced susceptibility to bias in a simulated setting. Reflecting further may be required to overcome bias, but succeeding depends on having the appropriate knowledge. Future research should examine whether the findings apply to real practice and to more experienced physicians

Dominant-negative mutations in human IL6ST underlie hyper-IgE syndrome

Autosomal dominant hyper-IgE syndrome (AD-HIES) is typically caused by dominant-negative (DN) STAT3 mutations. Patients suffer from cold staphylococcal lesions and mucocutaneous candidiasis, severe allergy, and skeletal abnormalities. We report 12 patients from 8 unrelated kindreds with AD-HIES due to DN IL6ST mutations. We identified seven different truncating mutations, one of which was recurrent. The mutant alleles encode GP130 receptors bearing the transmembrane domain but lacking both the recycling motif and all four STAT3-recruiting tyrosine residues. Upon overexpression, the mutant proteins accumulate at the cell surface and are loss of function and DN for cellular responses to IL-6, IL-11, LIF, and OSM. Moreover, the patients’ heterozygous leukocytes and fibroblasts respond poorly to IL-6 and IL-11. Consistently, patients with STAT3 and IL6ST mutations display infectious and allergic manifestations of IL-6R deficiency, and some of the skeletal abnormalities of IL-11R deficiency. DN STAT3 and IL6ST mutations thus appear to underlie clinical phenocopies through impairment of the IL-6 and IL-11 response pathways

Effects of study intention and generating multiple choice questions on expository text retention

Teachers often recommend their students to generate test questions and answers as a means of preparing for an exam. There is a paucity of research on the effects of this instructional strategy. Two recent studies showed positive effects of generating test questions relative to restudy, but these studies did not control for time on task. Moreover, the scarce research available has been limited to the effects of generating open-ended questions. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate whether generating multiple-choice test questions would foster retention (as measured by a multiple-choice test) relative to restudy when time would be kept constant across conditions. Using a 2 × 2 design, university students (N = 143) studied a text with the intention of either generating test items or performing well on a test, and then either generated multiple-choice items or restudied the text. Retention was measured by means of a multiple-choice test, both immediately after learning and after a one-week delay. Results showed no effects of study intention. Generating multiple-choice items resulted in lower test performance than restudying the text for the same amount of time

Impact of diagnostic checklists on the interpretation of normal and abnormal electrocardiograms

Checklists that aim to support clinicians' diagnostic reasoning processes are often recommended to prevent diagnostic errors. Evidence on checklist effectiveness is mixed and seems to depend on checklist type, case difficulty, and participants' expertise. Existing studies primarily use abnormal cases, leaving it unclear how the diagnosis of normal cases is affected by checklist use. We investigated how content-specific and debiasing checklists impacted performance for normal and abnormal cases in electrocardiogram (ECG) diagnosis. In this randomized experiment, 42 first year general practice residents interpreted normal, simple abnormal, and complex abnormal ECGs without a checklist. One week later, they were randomly assigned to diagnose the ECGs again with either a debiasing or content-specific checklist. We measured residents' diagnostic accuracy, confidence, patient management, and time taken to diagnose. Additionally, confidence-Accuracy calibration was assessed. Accuracy, confidence, and patient management were not significantly affected by checklist use. Time to diagnose decreased with a checklist (M=147s (77)) compared to without a checklist (M=189s (80), Z=-3.10, p=0.002). Additionally, residents' calibration improved when using a checklist (phase 1: R2=0.14, phase 2: R2=0.40). In both normal and abnormal cases, checklist use improved confidence-Accuracy calibration, though accuracy and confidence were not significantly affected. Time to diagnose was reduced. Future research should evaluate this effect in more experienced GPs. Checklists appear promising for reducing overconfidence without negatively impacting normal or simple ECGs. Reducing overconfidence has the potential to improve diagnostic performance in the long term

Deliberate practice of diagnostic clinical reasoning reveals low performance and improvement of diagnostic justification in pre-clerkship students

Abstract Purpose Diagnostic errors are a large burden on patient safety and improving clinical reasoning (CR) education could contribute to reducing these errors. To this end, calls have been made to implement CR training as early as the first year of medical school. However, much is still unknown about pre-clerkship students’ reasoning processes. The current study aimed to observe how pre-clerkship students use clinical information during the diagnostic process. Methods In a prospective observational study, pre-clerkship medical students completed 10–11 self-directed online simulated CR diagnostic cases. CR skills assessed included: creation of the differential diagnosis (Ddx), diagnostic justification (DxJ), ordering investigations, and identifying the most probable diagnosis. Student performances were compared to expert-created scorecards and students received detailed individualized formative feedback for every case. Results 121 of 133 (91%) first- and second-year medical students consented to the research project. Students scored much lower for DxJ compared to scores obtained for creation of the Ddx, ordering tests, and identifying the correct diagnosis, (30–48% lower, p < 0.001). Specifically, students underutilized physical exam data (p < 0.001) and underutilized data that decreased the probability of incorrect diagnoses (p < 0.001). We observed that DxJ scores increased 40% after 10–11 practice cases (p < 0.001). Conclusions We implemented deliberate practice with formative feedback for CR starting in the first year of medical school. Students underperformed in DxJ, particularly with analyzing the physical exam data and pertinent negative data. We observed significant improvement in DxJ performance with increased practice