Suppr超能文献

双重加工与诊断错误。

Dual processing and diagnostic errors.

作者信息

Norman Geoff

机构信息

Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, ON, Canada.

出版信息

Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2009 Sep;14 Suppl 1:37-49. doi: 10.1007/s10459-009-9179-x. Epub 2009 Aug 11.

Abstract

In this paper, I review evidence from two theories in psychology relevant to diagnosis and diagnostic errors. "Dual Process" theories of thinking, frequently mentioned with respect to diagnostic error, propose that categorization decisions can be made with either a fast, unconscious, contextual process called System 1 or a slow, analytical, conscious, and conceptual process, called System 2. Exemplar theories of categorization propose that many category decisions in everyday life are made by unconscious matching to a particular example in memory, and these remain available and retrievable individually. I then review studies of clinical reasoning based on these theories, and show that the two processes are equally effective; System 1, despite its reliance in idiosyncratic, individual experience, is no more prone to cognitive bias or diagnostic error than System 2. Further, I review evidence that instructions directed at encouraging the clinician to explicitly use both strategies can lead to consistent reduction in error rates.

摘要

在本文中,我回顾了心理学中与诊断及诊断错误相关的两种理论的证据。经常在诊断错误方面被提及的思维“双过程”理论提出,分类决策既可以通过一种快速、无意识、基于情境的过程(称为系统1)做出,也可以通过一种缓慢、分析性、有意识且基于概念的过程(称为系统2)做出。分类的范例理论提出,日常生活中的许多分类决策是通过无意识地与记忆中的特定示例进行匹配做出的,并且这些示例仍然可以单独获取和检索。然后,我回顾了基于这些理论的临床推理研究,并表明这两个过程同样有效;系统1尽管依赖于独特的个人经验,但并不比系统2更容易出现认知偏差或诊断错误。此外,我回顾了相关证据,即旨在鼓励临床医生明确使用这两种策略的指导可以导致错误率持续降低。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验