Suppr超能文献

事后偏见对治疗决策的影响。

Post Hoc Bias in Treatment Decisions.

机构信息

Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Evaluative Clinical Sciences Program, Sunnybrook Research Institute, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

出版信息

JAMA Netw Open. 2024 Sep 3;7(9):e2431123. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.31123.

Abstract

IMPORTANCE

A goal of health care is to reduce symptoms and improve health status, whereas continuing dubious treatments can contribute to complacency, discourage the search for alternatives, and lead to shortfalls in care.

OBJECTIVE

To test a potential bias in intuitive reasoning following a marginal improvement in symptoms after a dubious treatment (post hoc bias).

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Surveys eliciting treatment recommendations for hypothetical patients were sent to community members throughout North America recruited via an online survey platform in the early winter months of 2023 and 2024 and presented to health care professionals (pharmacists who were approached in person using a secret shopper technique) in the summer months of 2023.

EXPOSURE

Respondents received randomized versions of surveys that differed according to whether vague symptoms improved or remained unchanged after a dubious treatment.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was a recommendation to continue treatment.

RESULTS

In total, 1497 community members (mean [SD] age, 38.1 [12.5] years; 663 female [55.3%]) and 100 health care professionals were contacted. The first scenario described a patient with a sore throat who took unprescribed antibiotics; respondents were more likely to continue antibiotics after initial treatment if there was a marginal improvement in symptoms vs when symptoms remained unchanged (67 of 150 respondents [45%] vs 25 of respondents [17%]; odds ratio [OR], 3.98 [95% CI, 2.33-6.78]; P < .001). Another scenario described a patient with wrist pain who wore a copper bracelet; respondents were more likely to continue wearing the copper bracelet after initial care was followed by a marginal improvement in symptoms vs when symptoms remained unchanged (78 of 100 respondents [78%] vs 25 of 99 respondents [25%]; OR, 16.19 [95% CI, 5.32-19.52]; P < .001). A third scenario described a patient with fatigue who took unprescribed vitamin B12; respondents were more likely to continue taking vitamin B12 when initial treatment was followed by a marginal improvement in symptoms vs when symptoms remained unchanged (80 of 100 respondents [80%] vs 33 of 100 respondents [33%]; OR, 7.91 [95% CI, 4.18-14.97]; P < .001). Four further scenarios involving dubious treatments found similar results, including when tested on health care professionals.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this study of clinical scenarios, a marginal improvement in symptoms led patients to continue a dubious and sometimes costly treatment, suggesting that clinicians should caution patients against post hoc bias.

摘要

重要性

医疗保健的目标是减轻症状并改善健康状况,而继续使用可疑的治疗方法可能会导致自满,阻碍对替代方法的探索,并导致护理不足。

目的

测试在可疑治疗后症状略有改善后直觉推理中潜在的偏见(事后偏见)。

设计、地点和参与者:在 2023 年初冬和 2024 年通过在线调查平台招募了来自北美的社区成员,并通过在线调查平台向他们发送了调查,以征集对假设患者的治疗建议,并向医疗保健专业人员(通过秘密购物者技术亲自联系的药剂师)展示。

暴露

受访者收到了根据可疑治疗后模糊症状是否改善或保持不变而有所不同的随机版本的调查。

主要结果和措施

主要结果是继续治疗的建议。

结果

总共联系了 1497 名社区成员(平均[SD]年龄,38.1[12.5]岁;663 名女性[55.3%])和 100 名医疗保健专业人员。第一个场景描述了一个喉咙痛的患者服用了未经处方的抗生素;与症状不变相比,如果初始治疗后症状略有改善,受访者更有可能继续使用抗生素(150 名受访者中的 67 名[45%]与 99 名受访者中的 25 名[17%];优势比[OR],3.98[95%CI,2.33-6.78];P<0.001)。另一个场景描述了一个手腕疼痛的患者佩戴了铜手镯;与症状不变相比,如果初始护理后症状略有改善,受访者更有可能继续佩戴铜手镯(100 名受访者中的 78 名[78%]与 99 名受访者中的 25 名[25%];OR,16.19[95%CI,5.32-19.52];P<0.001)。第三个场景描述了一个疲劳的患者服用了未经处方的维生素 B12;与症状不变相比,如果初始治疗后症状略有改善,受访者更有可能继续服用维生素 B12(100 名受访者中的 80 名[80%]与 100 名受访者中的 33 名[33%];OR,7.91[95%CI,4.18-14.97];P<0.001)。另外四个涉及可疑治疗的场景也发现了类似的结果,包括在医疗保健专业人员中进行的测试。

结论和相关性

在这项临床场景研究中,症状的轻微改善导致患者继续使用可疑且有时昂贵的治疗方法,这表明临床医生应告诫患者避免事后偏见。

相似文献

1
Post Hoc Bias in Treatment Decisions.事后偏见对治疗决策的影响。
JAMA Netw Open. 2024 Sep 3;7(9):e2431123. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.31123.
5
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.考克兰新生儿协作网的未来。
Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12.

本文引用的文献

3
The Fallacy of a Single Diagnosis.单一诊断的谬误。
Med Decis Making. 2023 Feb;43(2):183-190. doi: 10.1177/0272989X221121343. Epub 2022 Sep 5.
5
Pitfalls from Psychology Science that Worsen with Practice.心理学研究中的陷阱会随着实践而恶化。
J Gen Intern Med. 2020 Oct;35(10):3050-3052. doi: 10.1007/s11606-020-05864-5. Epub 2020 May 6.
6
Placebo and Nocebo Effects.安慰剂和反安慰剂效应。
N Engl J Med. 2020 Feb 6;382(6):554-561. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra1907805.
7
Practicing Medicine with Colleagues: Pitfalls from Social Psychology Science.与同事共事:社会心理学科学中的陷阱。
J Gen Intern Med. 2019 Apr;34(4):624-626. doi: 10.1007/s11606-019-04839-5. Epub 2019 Jan 31.
8
Adverse Effects of Nutraceuticals and Dietary Supplements.营养保健品和膳食补充剂的不良影响。
Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol. 2018 Jan 6;58:583-601. doi: 10.1146/annurev-pharmtox-010617-052844. Epub 2017 Oct 6.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验