Is bias in the eye of the beholder? A vignette study to assess recognition of cognitive biases in clinical case workups
- PMID: 26825476
- DOI: 10.1136/bmjqs-2015-005014
Is bias in the eye of the beholder? A vignette study to assess recognition of cognitive biases in clinical case workups
Abstract
Background: Many authors have implicated cognitive biases as a primary cause of diagnostic error. If this is so, then physicians already familiar with common cognitive biases should consistently identify biases present in a clinical workup. The aim of this paper is to determine whether physicians agree on the presence or absence of particular biases in a clinical case workup and how case outcome knowledge affects bias identification.
Methods: We conducted a web survey of 37 physicians. Each participant read eight cases and listed which biases were present from a list provided. In half the cases the outcome implied a correct diagnosis; in the other half, it implied an incorrect diagnosis. We compared the number of biases identified when the outcome implied a correct or incorrect primary diagnosis. Additionally, the agreement among participants about presence or absence of specific biases was assessed.
Results: When the case outcome implied a correct diagnosis, an average of 1.75 cognitive biases were reported; when incorrect, 3.45 biases (F=71.3, p<0.00001). Individual biases were reported from 73% to 125% more often when an incorrect diagnosis was implied. There was no agreement on presence or absence of individual biases, with κ ranging from 0.000 to 0.044.
Interpretation: Individual physicians are unable to agree on the presence or absence of individual cognitive biases. Their judgements are heavily influenced by hindsight bias; when the outcome implies a diagnostic error, twice as many biases are identified. The results present challenges for current error reduction strategies based on identification of cognitive biases.
Keywords: Cognitive biases; Diagnostic errors; Patient safety.
Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.
Comment in
-
Premature closure? Not so fast.BMJ Qual Saf. 2017 Feb;26(2):87-89. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2016-005267. Epub 2016 Mar 15. BMJ Qual Saf. 2017. PMID: 26980778 No abstract available.
-
Why do we love to hate ourselves?BMJ Qual Saf. 2017 Feb;26(2):167-168. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2016-005591. Epub 2016 Apr 28. BMJ Qual Saf. 2017. PMID: 27126287 No abstract available.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources