IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v11y1991i3p159-168.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Availability, Wishful Thinking, and Physicians' Diagnostic Judgments for Patients with Suspected Bacteremia

Author

Listed:
  • Roy M. Poses
  • Michele Anthony

Abstract

A prospective cohort study was done to assess the effects of value bias and the inappropriate use of the availability heuristic on physicians' judgments of the probability of bacteremia. Subjects of the study were 227 medical inpatients in a university hospital who had blood cultures done. Estimates of the probabilities that individual patients would have positive blood cultures were collected from the house officers who ordered the cultures. Clinical data and culture results were also obtained. Based on the data the authors calculated "value varia bles," reflecting doctors' assessments of the risks that individual patients would die in the hospital if they were to have bacteremia. "Recalled experience variables" reflected the doctors' recollections of recent experiences with patients with bacteremia. The physicians significantly overestimated the likelihood of bacteremia for most of their patients. Their ROC curve for this diagnosis showed moderate discriminating ability (area = 0.687, SE = 0.073). Two recalled experience variables were significantly associated with the physicians' prob ability estimates. The value variables were significantly inversely associated with them. These relationships were independent of several clinical variables and measures of disease severity. The physicians' intuitive diagnostic judgments were thus influenced by the availability heu ristic and by wishful thinking, a form of the value bias. The availability heuristic may mislead physicians by causing them to believe that random variations in the prevalence of a non- epidemic disease represent real trends. Wishful thinking may lead physicians to underes timate the likelihood of a disease for patients most at risk for its consequences. Teaching physicians to develop better judgmental strategies may improve the quality of their judgments and hence their patient care. Key words: diagnosis; probability; septicemia; availability heu ristic ; value bias. (Med Decis Making 1991;11:159-168)

Suggested Citation

  • Roy M. Poses & Michele Anthony, 1991. "Availability, Wishful Thinking, and Physicians' Diagnostic Judgments for Patients with Suspected Bacteremia," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 11(3), pages 159-168, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:11:y:1991:i:3:p:159-168
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X9101100303
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X9101100303
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X9101100303?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Nuno Camacho & Bas Donkers & Stefan Stremersch, 2011. "Predictably Non-Bayesian: Quantifying Salience Effects in Physician Learning About Drug Quality," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(2), pages 305-320, 03-04.
    2. Taku Harada & Yukinori Harada & Kohei Morinaga & Takanobu Hirosawa & Taro Shimizu, 2022. "Bandemia as an Early Predictive Marker of Bacteremia: A Retrospective Cohort Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(4), pages 1-8, February.
    3. Braverman, Jennifer A. & Blumenthal-Barby, J.S., 2012. "Assessment of the sunk-cost effect in clinical decision-making," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 75(1), pages 186-192.
    4. J. Edward Russo & Margaret G. Meloy & T. Jeffrey Wilks, 2000. "Predecisional Distortion of Information by Auditors and Salespersons," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(1), pages 13-27, January.
    5. Justin M. Ross & Sarah E. Larson & Chad Wall, 2012. "Are Surveys Of Experts Unbiased? Evidence From College Football Rankings," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 30(4), pages 502-522, October.

    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:sae:medema:v:11:y:1991:i:3:p:159-168. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.