Advertisement

Clinical Decision Making

  • Pat CroskerryEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

In every domain of medicine, decisions are continuously being made about patients’ diagnosis and management. Arguably, decision making is the most important aspect of a patient’s care and the most likely to affect their safety, yet physicians generally do not receive comprehensive training in this basic skill. In this chapter, dual process theory, the dominant model of clinical decision making, is reviewed. The two basic modes of decision making are intuitive and analytical. The properties of the two systems are discussed, as is their dynamic relationship with each other in the operating characteristics of the model.

Many of the requirements for improving decision making can be found in the burgeoning literature on critical thinking. Significant gains in decision making skills can be made by teaching the basics of decision making within a critical-thinking framework and by thoroughly understanding the nature and extent of cognitive and affective biases and how to mitigate them. There remains an overarching need for research in clinical decision making that is relevant to the clinical settings and conditions under which decisions are made.

Keywords

Clinical decision making Dual process theory Cognitive and affective bias Cognitive de-biasing Critical thinking 

References

  1. 1.
    Rao G. Rational medical decision making: a case based approach. New York: McGraw-Hill Medical; 2007.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lakoff G, Johnson M. Philosophy in the flesh: the embodied mind and its challenge to western thought. New York: Basic Books; 1999.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Croskerry P. From mindless to mindful practice: cognitive bias and clinical decision making. N Engl J Med. 2013;368(26):2445–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    American Psychological Association. Glossary of psychological terms. From: http://www.apa.org/research/action/glossary.aspx. Retrieved 30 May 2013.
  5. 5.
    Croskerry P. Clinical cognition and diagnostic error: applications of a dual process model of reasoning. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2009;14:27–35.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lieberman MD, Jarcho JM, Satpute AB. Evidence-based and intuition-based self-knowledge: an FMRI study. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2004;87(4):421–35.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Schneider W, Shiffrin RM. Controlled and automatic human information processing: 1. Detection, search, and attention. Psychol Rev. 1977;84:1–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dawson NV. Physician judgment in clinical settings: methodological influences and cognitive performance. Clin Chem. 1993;39:1468–80.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Croskerry P. A universal model for diagnostic reasoning. Acad Med. 2009;84:1022–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Stanovich KE. The robot’s rebellion: finding meaning in the age of Darwin. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press; 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Campbell WW. Augenblickdiagnose. Semin Neurol. 1998;18:169–76.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Silen W. Cope’s early diagnosis of the acute abdomen. 15th ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 1979.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Smallberg G. Bias is the nose for the story. In: Brockman J, editor. This will make you smarter. New York: Harper Perennial; 2012. p. 43–5.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kahneman D. Thinking, fast and slow. 7th ed. Toronto: Doubleday Canada; 2011.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Denes-Raj V, Epstein S. Conflict between intuitive and rational processing: when people behave against their better judgment. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1994;66:819–29.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hogarth RM. Educating intuition. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press; 2001.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Stanovich KE. Dysrationalia: a new specific learning disability. J Learn Disabil. 1993;26:501–15.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rorty AO. Self-deception, akrasia and irrationality. In: Elster J, editor. The multiple self. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1985. p. 115–31.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kalis A, Mojzisch A, Schweizer TS, Kaiser S. Weakness of will, akrasia, and the neuropsychiatry of decision making: an interdisciplinary perspective. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2008;8:402–17.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Stroud S, Tappolet C. Weakness of will and practical irrationality. New York: Oxford University Press; 2008.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hammond KR. Intuitive and analytic cognition: information models. In: Sage A, editor. Concise encyclopedia of information processing in systems and organizations. Oxford: Pergamon Press; 1990. p. 306–12.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Critical Thinking Community. Our concept and definition of critical thinking. From: http://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/our-concept-of-critical-thinking/411. Accessed 20 May 2013.
  23. 23.
    Croskerry P. ED cognition: any decision by anyone at any time. ED administration series. CJEM. 2014;16(1):13–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Croskerry P, Musson D. Individual factors in patient safety. In: Croskerry P, Cosby KS, Schenkel S, Wears R, editors. Patient safety in emergency medicine. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2008. p. 269–76.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Croskerry P. Context is everything or how could I have been that stupid? Healthc Q. 2009;12(Suppl):e171–s1763. doi: 10.12927/hcq.2009.20945.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Croskerry P. The importance of cognitive errors in diagnosis and strategies to prevent them. Acad Med. 2003;78:1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Croskerry P. Cognitive and affective dispositions to respond. In: Croskerry P, Cosby KS, Schenkel S, Wears R, editors. Patient safety in emergency medicine. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2008. p. 219–27.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Jenicek M. Medical error and harm: understanding, prevention and control. New York: Productivity Press, Taylor and Francis Group; 2011.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. List of cognitive biases. From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases. Accessed 31 May 2013.
  30. 30.
    Dobelli R. The art of thinking clearly. New York: HarperCollins; 2013.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    The Critical Thinking Community: Critical Thinking: Where to Begin. From: http://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/critical-thinking-where-to-begin/796. Accessed 1 May 2013.
  32. 32.
    Croskerry P. Bias: a normal operating characteristic of the diagnosing brain. Diagnosis. 2014;1:23–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Stiegler MP, Neelankavil JP, Canales C, Dhillon A. Cognitive errors detected in anaesthesiology. Br J Anaesth. 2012;108:229–35.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    David CV, Chira S, Eells SJ, Ladrigan M, Papier A, Miller LG, Craft N. Diagnostic accuracy in patients admitted to hospital with cellulitis. Dermatol Online J. 2011;17:1.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Croskerry P. Achieving quality in clinical decision making: cognitive strategies and detection of bias. Acad Emerg Med. 2002;9:1184–204.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Hershberger PJ, Markert RJ, Part HM, Cohen SM, Finger WW. Understanding and addressing cognitive bias in medical education. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 1997;1:221–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Vickrey BG, Samuels MA, Ropper AH. How neurologists think: a cognitive psychology perspective on missed diagnoses. Ann Neurol. 2010;67(4):425–33.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Dunphy BC, Cantwell R, Bourke S, Fleming M, Smith B, Joseph KS, Dunphy SL. Cognitive elements in clinical decision-making. Toward a cognitive model for medical education and understanding clinical reasoning. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2010;15:229–50.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Margo CE. A pilot study in ophthalmology of inter-rater reliability in classifying diagnostic errors: an under investigated area of medical error. Qual Saf Health Care. 2003;12:416–20.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Foucar E. Error in anatomic pathology. Am J Clin Pathol. 2001;116:S34–46.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Crowley RS, Legowski E, Medvedeva O, Reitmeyer K, Tseytlin E, Castine M, Jukic D, Mello-Thoms C. Automated detection of heuristics and biases among pathologists in a computer-based system. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2013;18(3):343–63. doi: 10.1007/s10459-012-9374-z. Published online: 23 May 2012.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Singh H, Thomas EJ, Wilson L, Kelly PA, Pietz K, Elkeeb D, Singhal G. Errors of diagnosis in pediatric practice: a multisite survey. Pediatrics. 2010;126:70–9.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Crumlish N, Kelly BD. How psychiatrists think. Adv Psychiatr Treat. 2009;15:72–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Sabih D, Sabih A, Sabih Q, Khan AN. Image perception and interpretation of abnormalities; can we believe our eyes? Can we do something about it? Insights Imaging. 2011;2:47–55.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Shiralkar U. Smart surgeons, sharp decisions: cognitive skills to avoid errors and achieve results. Shropshire: TFM Publishing; 2010.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Gillon SA, Radford ST. Zebra in the intensive care unit: a metacognitive reflection on misdiagnosis. Crit Care Resusc. 2012;14:216–21.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Hicks EP, Kluemper GT. Heuristic reasoning and cognitive biases: are they hindrances to judgments and decision making in orthodontics? Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011;139:297–304.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Fischoff B. Debiasing. In: Kahneman D, Slovic P, Tversky A, editors. Judgment under uncertainty; heuristics and biases. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1982. p. 422–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Kahneman D, Slovic P, Tversky A, editors. Judgment under uncertainty; heuristics and biases. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1982.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Plous S. The psychology of judgment and decision making. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1993.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Baron J. Thinking and deciding. 3rd ed. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2000.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Gilovich T, Griffin D, Kahneman D. Heuristics and biases: the psychology of intuitive judgment. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Bishop MA, Trout JD. Epistemology and the psychology of human judgment. New York: Oxford University Press; 2005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Vohs KD, Baumeister RE, Loewenstein G. Do emotions help or hurt decision making? A hedgefoxian perspective. New York: Russell Sage; 2007.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Damasio A. Self comes to mind: constructing the conscious brain. New York: Pantheon Books; 2010.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Konnikova M. Mastermind: how to think like Sherlock Holmes. New York: Viking; 2013.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Markman A. Smart thinking; three essential keys to solve problems, innovate, and get things done. New York: Perigree; 2012.Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Chabris C, Simons D. The invisible gorilla. New York: Crown; 2010.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Lehrer J. How we decide. New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt; 2009.Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Hallinan JT. Why we make mistakes: how we look without seeing, forget things in seconds, and are all pretty sure we are way above average. New York: Broadway Books; 2009.Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Thaler RH, Sunstein CR. Nudge: improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. New York: Penguin; 2008.Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Brafman O, Brafman R. Sway: the irresistible pull of irrational behavior. New York: Broadway Books; 2008.Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Ariely D. Predictably irrational: the hidden forces that shape our decisions. New York: HarperCollins; 2008.Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Wolpert L. Six impossible things before breakfast: the evolutionary origins of belief. New York: W.W. Norton; 2007.Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Tavris C, Aronson E. Mistakes were made (but not by me): why we justify foolish beliefs, bad decisions and hurtful acts. Orlando: Harcourt Inc.; 2007.Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Myers DG. Intuition: its powers and perils. New Haven: Yale University Press; 2002.Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Piattelli-Palmarini M. Inevitable illusions: how mistakes of reason rule our minds. New York: Wiley; 1994.Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Stanovich KE. Rationality and the reflective mind. New York: Oxford University Press; 2011.Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Graber ML, Kissam S, Payne VL, Meyer D, Sorensen A, Lenfestey N, et al. Cognitive interventions to reduce diagnostic error: a narrative review. BMJ Qual Saf. 2012;21:535–57.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Berner ES, Graber ML. Overconfidence as a cause of diagnostic error in medicine. Am J Med. 2008;121(5, Suppl 1):S2–23.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Croskerry P, Singhal G, Mamede S. Cognitive debiasing 1: origins of bias and theory of de-biasing. BMJ Qual Saf. 2013;22 Suppl 2:ii58–64.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Croskerry P, Singhal G, Mamede S. Cognitive debiasing 2: impediments to and strategies for change. BMJ Qual Saf. 2013;22 Suppl 2:ii65–72.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Eichhorn R. Developing thinking skills: critical thinking at the army management staff college. Strategic Systems Department Army Management Staff College. 2013. From: http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/army/critical/roy.htm. Accessed 15 May 2013.
  74. 74.
    Miller DR. Longitudinal assessment of critical thinking in pharmacy students. Am J Pharm Educ. 2003;67:1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Solon T. Generic critical thinking infusion and course content learning in introductory psychology. J Instr Psychol. 2007;34:95–109.Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    Twardy CR. Argument maps improve critical thinking. Teach Philos. 2004;27:2.Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Butler HA, Dwyer CP, Hogan MJ, Franco A, Riva SF, Saiz C, Almeida LS. The halpern critical thinking assessment and real-world outcomes: cross-national applications. Thinking Skills Creativity. 2012;7:112–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Higgins S, Hall E, Baumfield V, Moseley D. A meta-analysis of the impact of the implementation of thinking skills approaches on pupils. In: Research evidence in education library. London: EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London; 2005. From: http://eppi.ioe.ac.uk/cms/Default.aspx?tabid=338. Accessed 30 May 2013.
  79. 79.
    Friend CM, Zubek JP. The effects of age on critical thinking ability. J Gerontol. 1958;13:407–13.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Denney NW. Critical thinking during the adult years: has the developmental function changed over the last four decades? Exp Aging Res. 1995;21:191–207.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Croskerry P, Petrie D, Reilly J, Tait G. Deciding about fast and slow decisions. Acad Med. 2014;2:197–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Fang FC, Casadevall A. Reductionistic and holistic science. Infect Immun. 2011;79:1401–4.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Stark M, Fins JJ. The ethical imperative to think about thinking. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics. 2014;23:386–96.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Critical Thinking Program, Division of Medical Education, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Emergency Medicine, QE – Health Sciences Centre, Halifax InfirmaryDalhousie UniversityHalifaxCanada

Personalised recommendations