Suppr超能文献

基于医院的输血医学中的推理陷阱。

Pitfalls of reasoning in hospital-based transfusion medicine.

作者信息

Raza Sheharyar, Jacobs Jeremy W, Booth Garrett S, Callum Jeannie

机构信息

Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Canadian Blood Services, Medical Affairs and Innovation, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

出版信息

Transfus Med. 2024 Dec;34(6):543-549. doi: 10.1111/tme.13104. Epub 2024 Oct 15.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Hospital-based transfusion involves hundreds of daily medical decisions. Medical decision-making under uncertainty is susceptible to cognitive biases which can lead to systematic errors of reasoning and suboptimal patient care. Here we review common cognitive biases that may be relevant for transfusion practice.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Biases were selected based on categorical diversity, evidence from healthcare contexts, and relevance for transfusion medicine. For each bias, we provide background psychology literature, representative clinical examples, considerations for transfusion medicine, and strategies for mitigation.

RESULTS

We report seven cognitive biases relating to memory (availability heuristic, limited memory), interpretation (framing effects, anchoring bias), and incentives (search satisficing, sunk cost fallacy, feedback sanction).

CONCLUSION

Pitfalls of reasoning due to cognitive biases are prominent in medical decision making and relevant for hospital transfusion medicine. An awareness of these phenomena might stimulate further research, encourage corrective measures, and motivate nudge-based interventions to improve transfusion practice.

摘要

引言

基于医院的输血涉及每日数百项医疗决策。在不确定性情况下进行医疗决策容易受到认知偏差的影响,这可能导致系统性的推理错误和次优的患者护理。在此,我们回顾可能与输血实践相关的常见认知偏差。

材料与方法

基于类别多样性、医疗保健背景的证据以及与输血医学的相关性来选择偏差。对于每种偏差,我们提供背景心理学文献、代表性临床实例、输血医学考量以及缓解策略。

结果

我们报告了七种与记忆(可得性启发法、有限记忆)、解释(框架效应、锚定偏差)和激励(搜索满意、沉没成本谬误、反馈制裁)相关的认知偏差。

结论

认知偏差导致的推理陷阱在医疗决策中很突出,并且与医院输血医学相关。对这些现象的认识可能会激发进一步的研究,鼓励采取纠正措施,并推动基于助推的干预措施来改善输血实践。

相似文献

1
Pitfalls of reasoning in hospital-based transfusion medicine.
Transfus Med. 2024 Dec;34(6):543-549. doi: 10.1111/tme.13104. Epub 2024 Oct 15.
2
Cognitive biases and heuristics in medical decision making: a critical review using a systematic search strategy.
Med Decis Making. 2015 May;35(4):539-57. doi: 10.1177/0272989X14547740. Epub 2014 Aug 21.
3
Clinical decision making in physical therapy - Exploring the 'heuristic' in clinical practice.
Musculoskelet Sci Pract. 2022 Dec;62:102674. doi: 10.1016/j.msksp.2022.102674. Epub 2022 Oct 13.
5
Cognitive biases associated with medical decisions: a systematic review.
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2016 Nov 3;16(1):138. doi: 10.1186/s12911-016-0377-1.
6
Clinical reasoning in dire times. Analysis of cognitive biases in clinical cases during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Intern Emerg Med. 2022 Jun;17(4):979-988. doi: 10.1007/s11739-021-02884-9. Epub 2022 Jan 8.
7
Clinicians' Cognitive and Affective Biases and the Practice of Psychotherapy.
Am J Psychother. 2021 Aug 1;74(3):119-126. doi: 10.1176/appi.psychotherapy.20200025. Epub 2021 Jan 15.
8
Heuristic reasoning and cognitive biases: Are they hindrances to judgments and decision making in orthodontics?
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011 Mar;139(3):297-304. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2010.05.018.
9
Medicine and heuristics: cognitive biases and medical decision-making.
Ir J Med Sci. 2020 Nov;189(4):1477-1484. doi: 10.1007/s11845-020-02235-1. Epub 2020 May 14.
10
Decision making biases in the allied health professions: A systematic scoping review.
PLoS One. 2020 Oct 20;15(10):e0240716. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0240716. eCollection 2020.

本文引用的文献

1
Oxygen Extraction Ratios to Guide Red Blood Cell Transfusion.
Transfus Med Rev. 2024 Jul;38(3):150834. doi: 10.1016/j.tmrv.2024.150834. Epub 2024 May 7.
2
The historical origins of modern international normalized ratio targets.
J Thromb Haemost. 2024 Aug;22(8):2184-2194. doi: 10.1016/j.jtha.2024.05.013. Epub 2024 May 23.
3
Leading digit bias in hemoglobin thresholds for red cell transfusion.
Transfusion. 2024 May;64(5):793-799. doi: 10.1111/trf.17827. Epub 2024 Apr 6.
5
User-Centered Design to Reduce Inappropriate Blood Transfusion Orders.
Appl Clin Inform. 2023 Jan;14(1):28-36. doi: 10.1055/s-0042-1759866. Epub 2023 Jan 11.
6
Massive Hemorrhage Protocol: A Practical Approach to the Bleeding Trauma Patient.
Emerg Med Clin North Am. 2023 Feb;41(1):51-69. doi: 10.1016/j.emc.2022.09.010.
7
Plasma transfusion practices: A multicentre electronic audit.
Vox Sang. 2022 Oct;117(10):1211-1219. doi: 10.1111/vox.13355. Epub 2022 Sep 14.
8
Positive Attribute Framing Increases COVID-19 Booster Vaccine Intention for Unfamiliar Vaccines.
Vaccines (Basel). 2022 Jun 16;10(6):962. doi: 10.3390/vaccines10060962.
9
Apparent sunk cost effect in rational agents.
Sci Adv. 2022 Feb 11;8(6):eabi7004. doi: 10.1126/sciadv.abi7004.
10
Massive transfusion and severe blood shortages: establishing and implementing predictors of futility.
Br J Anaesth. 2022 Feb;128(2):e71-e74. doi: 10.1016/j.bja.2021.10.013. Epub 2021 Nov 15.

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