Debiasing versus knowledge retrieval checklists to reduce diagnostic error in ECG interpretation.
Clicks: 378
ID: 92194
2019
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Steady Performance
30.0
/100
378 views
38 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
SteadyRanked #9 of 14 articles by views in advances in health sciences education : theory and practice
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
There is an ongoing debate regarding the cause of diagnostic errors. One view is that errors result from unconscious application of cognitive heuristics; the alternative is that errors are a consequence of knowledge deficits. The objective of this study was to compare the effectiveness of checklists that (a) identify and address cognitive biases or (b) promote knowledge retrieval, as a means to reduce errors in ECG interpretation. Novice postgraduate year (PGY) 1 emergency medicine and internal medicine residents (n = 40) and experienced cardiology fellows (PGY 4-6) (n = 21) were randomly allocated to three conditions: a debiasing checklist, a content (knowledge) checklist, or control (no checklist) to be used while interpreting 20 ECGs. Half of the ECGs were deliberately engineered to predispose to bias. Diagnostic performance under either checklist intervention was not significantly better than the control. As expected, more errors occurred when cases were designed to induce bias (F = 96.9, p < 0.0001). There was no significant interaction between the instructional condition and level of learner. Checklists attempting to help learners identify cognitive bias or mobilize domain-specific knowledge did not have an overall effect in reducing diagnostic errors in ECG interpretation, although they may help novices. Even when cognitive biases are deliberately inserted in cases, cognitive debiasing checklists did not improve participants' performance.
| Reference Key |
sibbald2019debiasingadvances
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Sibbald, Matt;Sherbino, Jonathan;Ilgen, Jonathan S;Zwaan, Laura;Blissett, Sarah;Monteiro, Sandra;Norman, Geoffrey; |
| Journal | advances in health sciences education : theory and practice |
| Year | 2019 |
| DOI |
10.1007/s10459-019-09875-8
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.