IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v70y2010i11p1728-1736.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What do physicians gain (and lose) with experience? Qualitative results from a cross-national study of diabetes

Author

Listed:
  • Elstad, Emily A.
  • Lutfey, Karen E.
  • Marceau, Lisa D.
  • Campbell, Stephen M.
  • von dem Knesebeck, Olaf
  • McKinlay, John B.

Abstract

An empirical puzzle has emerged over the last several decades of research on variation in clinical decision making involving mixed effects of physician experience. There is some evidence that physicians with greater experience may provide poorer quality care than their less experienced counterparts, as captured by various quality assurance measures. Physician experience is traditionally narrowly defined as years in practice or age, and there is a need for investigation into precisely what happens to physicians as they gain experience, including the reasoning and clinical skills acquired over time and the ways in which physicians consciously implement those skills into their work. In this study, we are concerned with 1) how physicians conceptualize and describe the meaning of their clinical experience, and 2) how they use their experience in clinical practice. To address these questions, we analyzed qualitative data drawn from in-depth interviews with physicians from the United States, United Kingdom, and Germany as a part of a larger factorial experiment of medical decision making for diabetes. Our results show that common measures of physician experience do not fully capture the skills physicians acquire over time or how they implement those skills in their clinical work. We found that what physicians actually gain over time is complex social, behavioral and intuitive wisdom as well as the ability to compare the present day patient against similar past patients. These active cognitive reasoning processes are essential components of a forward-looking research agenda in the area of physician experience and decision making. Guideline-based outcome measures, accompanied by underdeveloped age- and years-based definitions of experience, may prematurely conclude that more experienced physicians are providing deficient care while overlooking the ways in which they are providing more and better care than their less experienced counterparts.

Suggested Citation

  • Elstad, Emily A. & Lutfey, Karen E. & Marceau, Lisa D. & Campbell, Stephen M. & von dem Knesebeck, Olaf & McKinlay, John B., 2010. "What do physicians gain (and lose) with experience? Qualitative results from a cross-national study of diabetes," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 1728-1736, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:70:y:2010:i:11:p:1728-1736
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(10)00173-5
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gigerenzer, Gerd & Todd, Peter M. & ABC Research Group,, 2000. "Simple Heuristics That Make Us Smart," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195143812.
    2. Lutfey, Karen E. & Campbell, Stephen M. & Renfrew, Megan R. & Marceau, Lisa D. & Roland, Martin & McKinlay, John B., 2008. "How are patient characteristics relevant for physicians' clinical decision making in diabetes? An analysis of qualitative results from a cross-national factorial experiment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 67(9), pages 1391-1399, November.
    3. Greenhalgh, Joanne & Flynn, Rob & Long, Andrew F. & Tyson, Sarah, 2008. "Tacit and encoded knowledge in the use of standardised outcome measures in multidisciplinary team decision making: A case study of in-patient neurorehabilitation," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 183-194, July.
    4. Lutfey, Karen E. & Freese, Jeremy, 2007. "Ambiguities of chronic illness management and challenges to the medical error paradigm," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 314-325, January.
    5. May, Carl & Rapley, Tim & Moreira, Tiago & Finch, Tracy & Heaven, Ben, 2006. "Technogovernance: Evidence, subjectivity, and the clinical encounter in primary care medicine," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(4), pages 1022-1030, February.
    6. Balsa, Ana I. & McGuire, Thomas G., 2001. "Statistical discrimination in health care," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(6), pages 881-907, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Weiss, Marjorie Cecilia, 2011. "Diagnostic decision making: The last refuge for general practitioners?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 73(3), pages 375-382, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Eric French & Elaine Kelly & Richard Cookson & Carol Propper & Miqdad Asaria & Rosalind Raine, 2016. "Socio‐Economic Inequalities in Health Care in England," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 37, pages 371-403, September.
    2. Varcoe, Colleen & Browne, Annette J. & Wong, Sabrina & Smye, Victoria L., 2009. "Harms and benefits: Collecting ethnicity data in a clinical context," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 68(9), pages 1659-1666, May.
    3. Stephen A. Hillegeist & James P. Kavourakis & Matthew Pinnuck, 2023. "The association between quarter length, forecast errors, and firms’ voluntary disclosures," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 63(2), pages 1885-1918, June.
    4. Alex Stallman & Nicola Sheeran & Mark Boschen, 2023. "A Qualitative Exploration of General Practitioners’ Treatment Decision-Making for Depressive Symptoms," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 43(4), pages 498-507, May.
    5. Francetich, Alejandro & Kreps, David, 2020. "Choosing a good toolkit, II: Bayes-rule based heuristics," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    6. Andreassen, Hege K., 2011. "What does an e-mail address add? - Doing health and technology at home," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 72(4), pages 521-528, February.
    7. Timmermans, Stefan & Almeling, Rene, 2009. "Objectification, standardization, and commodification in health care: A conceptual readjustment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 21-27, July.
    8. Andrea Polonioli, 2013. "Re-assessing the Heuristics debate," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 12(2), pages 263-271, November.
    9. Magni, Carlo Alberto, 2007. "Investment decisions, equivalent risk and bounded rationality," MPRA Paper 6073, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Tani, Massimiliano, 2017. "Local signals and the returns to foreign education," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 174-190.
    11. Francetich, Alejandro & Kreps, David, 2020. "Choosing a good toolkit, I: Prior-free heuristics," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    12. Scoles, Brooke & Nicodemo, Catia, 2022. "Doctors’ attitudes toward specific medical conditions," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 204(C), pages 182-199.
    13. Setti Rais Ali & Paul Dourgnon & Lise Rochaix, 2018. "Social Capital or Education: What Matters Most to Cut Time to Diagnosis?," Working Papers halshs-01703170, HAL.
    14. Joanna Bryson, 2008. "Embodiment versus memetics," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 7(1), pages 77-94, June.
    15. Maroussia Favre & Didier Sornette, 2015. "A Generic Model of Dyadic Social Relationships," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(3), pages 1-16, March.
    16. Paul Stenner & Raffaele De Luca Picione, 2023. "A Theoretically Informed Critical Review of Research Applying the Concept of Liminality to Understand Experiences with Cancer: Implications for a New Oncological Agenda in Health Psychology," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(11), pages 1-21, May.
    17. Robin Hogarth & Natalia Karelaia, 2003. "Take-the-best and other simple strategies: Why and when they work 'well' in binary choice," Economics Working Papers 709, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    18. Felix C.H. Gottschalk, 2019. "Why prevent when it does not pay? Prevention when health services are credence goods," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(5), pages 693-709, May.
    19. Marc Jekel & Susann Fiedler & Andreas Glockner, 2011. "Diagnostic task selection for strategy classification in judgment and decision making," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 6(8), pages 782-799, December.
    20. Karla Hoff, 2016. "Behavioral Economics and Social Exclusion: Can Interventions Overcome Prejudice?," International Economic Association Series, in: Kaushik Basu & Joseph E. Stiglitz (ed.), Inequality and Growth: Patterns and Policy, chapter 6, pages 172-200, Palgrave Macmillan.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:70:y:2010:i:11:p:1728-1736. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.