Joseph G M, Patel V L
Centre for Medical Education, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Med Decis Making. 1990 Jan-Mar;10(1):31-46. doi: 10.1177/0272989X9001000107.
The role of domain knowledge in the process of hypothesis generation during diagnostic reasoning was examined. Subjects were given a clinical case presented one segment at a time on a microcomputer. They were prompted to think aloud after presentation of each segment of the clinical case. A combination of discourse and protocol analysis techniques was used to investigate the problem solving process in two groups of experts working on an endocrine problem. The groups consisted of high-domain-knowledge subjects (HDK), endocrinologists, and low-domain-knowledge subjects (LDK), cardiologists. The results showed no significant differences between the groups in terms of selection of relevant and critical cues from the case. However, specific differences were found in the links or relations between the cues, with the HDK subjects using more relations to connect important information. The HDK subjects generated accurate diagnostic hypotheses early in the problem encounter and spent the rest of the time confirming the hypotheses by explaining the given cues. The LDK subjects also generated accurate diagnostic hypotheses but were unable to discriminate between and eliminate alternative hypotheses. A two-stage problem solving process and its relationship to domain specific knowledge are proposed.
研究了领域知识在诊断推理中假设生成过程中的作用。受试者会收到一个临床病例,该病例在微型计算机上逐段呈现。每呈现一段临床病例后,会促使他们出声思考。运用话语分析和协议分析技术相结合的方法,对两组研究内分泌问题的专家的问题解决过程进行了调查。这两组专家分别是领域知识丰富的受试者(HDK),即内分泌学家,以及领域知识较少的受试者(LDK),即心脏病学家。结果显示,两组在从病例中选择相关关键线索方面没有显著差异。然而,在线索之间的联系或关系上发现了具体差异,领域知识丰富的受试者使用更多的关系来连接重要信息。领域知识丰富的受试者在遇到问题的早期就生成了准确的诊断假设,并在剩余时间通过解释给定线索来确认这些假设。领域知识较少的受试者也生成了准确的诊断假设,但无法区分和排除替代假设。提出了一个两阶段的问题解决过程及其与领域特定知识的关系。