Effect of Availability Bias and Reflective Reasoning on Diagnostic Accuracy Among Internal Medicine Residents

Department of Psychology, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Burgemeester Oudlaan 50, Rotterdam, 3062 PA, The Netherlands.
JAMA The Journal of the American Medical Association (Impact Factor: 35.29). 09/2010; 304(11):1198-203. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2010.1276
Source: PubMed


Diagnostic errors have been associated with bias in clinical reasoning. Empirical evidence on the cognitive mechanisms underlying biases and effectiveness of educational strategies to counteract them is lacking.
To investigate whether recent experience with clinical problems provokes availability bias (overestimation of the likelihood of a diagnosis based on the ease with which it comes to mind) resulting in diagnostic errors and whether reflection (structured reanalysis of the case findings) counteracts this bias.
Experimental study conducted in 2009 at the Erasmus Medical Centre, Rotterdam, with 18 first-year and 18 second-year internal medicine residents. Participants first evaluated diagnoses of 6 clinical cases (phase 1). Subsequently, they diagnosed 8 different cases through nonanalytical reasoning, 4 of which had findings similar to previously evaluated cases but different diagnoses (phase 2). These 4 cases were subsequently diagnosed again through reflective reasoning (phase 3).
Mean diagnostic accuracy scores (perfect score, 4.0) on cases solved with or without previous exposure to similar problems through nonanalytical (phase 2) or reflective (phase 3) reasoning and frequency that a potentially biased (ie, phase 1) diagnosis was given.
There were no main effects, but there was a significant interaction effect between "years of training" and "recent experiences with similar problems." Results consistent with an availability bias occurred for the second-year residents, who scored lower on the cases similar to those previously encountered (1.55; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.15-1.96) than on the other cases (2.19; 95% CI, 1.73-2.66; P =.03). This pattern was not seen among the first-year residents (2.03; 95% CI, 1.55-2.51 vs 1.42; 95% CI, 0.92-1.92; P =.046). Second-year residents provided the phase 1 diagnosis more frequently for phase 2 cases they had previously encountered than for those they had not (mean frequency per resident, 1.44; 95% CI, 0.93-1.96 vs 0.72; 95% CI, 0.28-1.17; P =.04). A significant main effect of reasoning mode was found: reflection improved the diagnoses of the similar cases compared with nonanalytical reasoning for the second-year residents (2.03; 95% CI, 1.49-2.57) and the first-year residents (2.31; 95% CI, 1.89-2.73; P =.006).
When faced with cases similar to previous ones and using nonanalytic reasoning, second-year residents made errors consistent with the availability bias. Subsequent application of diagnostic reflection tended to counter this bias; it improved diagnostic accuracy in both first- and second-year residents.

Download full-text


Available from: Jan van Saase, Aug 20, 2014
    • "In contrast to the common belief among teachers, students' critical thinking skills hardly develop spontaneously as a side-effect of higher education (Davies 2013; Jones 2007): research has shown that many undergraduates do not seem to improve in critical thinking during their college years (Arum and Roksa 2011; Pascarella et al. 2011) and graduates from higher education frequently show poor thinking strategies (Flores et al. 2012). Teaching critical thinking skills, such as, for instance, unbiased reasoning, is essential for dynamic and complex professional environments such as economics (Smith 2003), legal judgment (Rachlinski 2004), and medicine (Mamede et al. 2010), in which biased reasoning can lead to erroneous decisions with severe financial, emotional, or even lethal consequences (e.g., Koehler et al. 2002). Therefore the present study aims to contribute to our knowledge about teaching critical thinking, by investigating the impact of instruction on reasoning performance and the role of dispositions, confidence, and mental effort before and after instruction. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Acquisition of critical thinking skills is considered an important goal in higher education, but it is still unclear which specific instructional techniques are effective for fostering it. The main aim of this study was to unravel the impact of critical thinking instructions, practice, and self-explanation prompts during practice, on students’ reasoning skills that are prone to bias. Another aim was to replicate findings regarding the influence of dispositions on reasoning skills prior to and after instructions, and to explore the relationship between reasoning performance, confidence, and invested mental effort prior to and after instructions. Economics students (N = 152) were randomly assigned to one of six conditions in a pre-test post-test control group design. Only participants exposed to critical thinking instruction improved their reasoning skills; practice and self-explanation prompts did not improve reasoning compared to instructions only. Dispositions (i.e., actively open-minded thinking) correlated positively with pre- and post-test reasoning scores; however, the instructions were equally effective for all participants. Confidence scores correlated negatively with invested mental effort. Instructions affected invested mental effort but not confidence ratings on the post-test. This study showed that first year economics students could enhance their reasoning performance by means of a short and relatively straightforward instructional intervention that was equally effective for all participants regardless of their disposition scores, which is promising for longer-term educational interventions.
    No preview · Article · Jul 2015 · Instructional Science
  • Source
    • "Other types of prospective methods involve presentation of hypothetical cases to assess physician cognitive error rates.17 18 However, these methods are mainly used to determine how varying circumstances or characteristics of physicians or patients influence error rates, and do not help determine incidence rates representative of a certain population. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Diagnostic errors remain an underemphasised and understudied area of patient safety research. We briefly summarise the methods that have been used to conduct research on epidemiology, contributing factors and interventions related to diagnostic error and outline directions for future research. Research methods that have studied epidemiology of diagnostic error provide some estimate on diagnostic error rates. However, there appears to be a large variability in the reported rates due to the heterogeneity of definitions and study methods used. Thus, future methods should focus on obtaining more precise estimates in different settings of care. This would lay the foundation for measuring error rates over time to evaluate improvements. Research methods have studied contributing factors for diagnostic error in both naturalistic and experimental settings. Both approaches have revealed important and complementary information. Newer conceptual models from outside healthcare are needed to advance the depth and rigour of analysis of systems and cognitive insights of causes of error. While the literature has suggested many potentially fruitful interventions for reducing diagnostic errors, most have not been systematically evaluated and/or widely implemented in practice. Research is needed to study promising intervention areas such as enhanced patient involvement in diagnosis, improving diagnosis through the use of electronic tools and identification and reduction of specific diagnostic process 'pitfalls' (eg, failure to conduct appropriate diagnostic evaluation of a breast lump after a 'normal' mammogram). The last decade of research on diagnostic error has made promising steps and laid a foundation for more rigorous methods to advance the field.
    Full-text · Article · Aug 2013 · BMJ quality & safety
  • Source
    • "No long-term effect was seen, although the intervention was limited in scope. Mamede showed that the tendency towards the availability bias could be partially attenuated in residents through the use of conscious reflection structured as a reanalysis of the case findings.21 Finally, Ogdie showed that residents who are taught about cognitive biases can successfully reflect on the role of bias in their own experiences, but the actual effect on diagnostic performance was not assessed.22 "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Diagnostic errors are a major patient safety concern. Although the majority of diagnostic errors are partially attributable to cognitive mistakes, the most effective means of improving clinician cognition in order to achieve gains in diagnostic reliability are unclear. We propose a tripartite educational agenda for improving diagnostic performance among students, residents and practising physicians. This agenda includes strengthening the metacognitive abilities of clinicians, fostering intuitive reasoning and increasing awareness of the role of systems in the diagnostic process. The evidence supporting initiatives in each of these realms is reviewed and a course of future implementation and study is proposed. The barriers to designing and implementing this agenda are substantial and include limited evidence supporting these initiatives and the challenges of changing the practice patterns of practising physicians. Implementation will need to be accompanied by rigorous evaluation.
    Full-text · Article · Jun 2013 · BMJ quality & safety
Show more