IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v23y2014i5-6p784-798.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A critical review: a combined conceptual framework of severity of illness and clinical judgement for analysing diagnostic judgements in critical illness

Author

Listed:
  • Margaret A Coulter Smith
  • Pam Smith
  • Rosemary Crow

Abstract

Aims and objectives To analyse theoretical literature on severity of illness and clinical judgement and propose a combined conceptual framework for judgements taken to identify patients' clinical states in critical illness and also to critically review and synthesise general severity of illness prognostic models to identify dimensions and attributes of severity of illness in critical illness. Background The effective treatment of the critically ill requires the early identification of severe illness, and in acute wards, this is predominantly addressed by applying early warning scores focusing on indicators of physiological severity. Clinical judgement complements the application of early warning scores, but is generally not the focus of research and so requires further investigation. Design A critical review of the literature. Methods Severity of illness and clinical judgement literature was reviewed to identify themes for a combined conceptual framework for patient assessment in critical illness. MEDLINE and CINAHL (January 1981–December 2011) were searched for general severity of illness prognostic models in critical illness. Eleven research and five systematic review papers meeting review inclusion criteria were selected. Results Severity of illness is found to be a crucial theoretical construct in critical illness. It can enhance descriptive models of clinical judgement (such as social judgment theory and an inference/correspondence model in diagnostic judgment) when used to analyse and reflect on judgements made to diagnose the clinical state of the patient. Conclusions A combined conceptual framework of severity of illness and a descriptive clinical judgement model further informs patient assessments about the identification of clinical states in critical illness, alongside early warning scores. Relevance to clinical practice This article contributes to an understanding of the complexity of patient assessment and diagnostic judgement in critical illness.

Suggested Citation

  • Margaret A Coulter Smith & Pam Smith & Rosemary Crow, 2014. "A critical review: a combined conceptual framework of severity of illness and clinical judgement for analysing diagnostic judgements in critical illness," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(5-6), pages 784-798, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:23:y:2014:i:5-6:p:784-798
    DOI: 10.1111/jocn.12463
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.12463
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jocn.12463?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Donna Katzman McClish & Stephen H. Powell, 1989. "How Well Can Physicians Estimate Mortality in a Medical Intensive Care Unit?," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 9(2), pages 125-132, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Sonia Pérez-Fernández & Pablo Martínez-Camblor & Peter Filzmoser & Norberto Corral, 2021. "Visualizing the decision rules behind the ROC curves: understanding the classification process," AStA Advances in Statistical Analysis, Springer;German Statistical Society, vol. 105(1), pages 135-161, March.
    2. Seifert, Matthias & Hadida, Allègre L., 2013. "On the relative importance of linear model and human judge(s) in combined forecasting," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 120(1), pages 24-36.
    3. Anqiang Huang & Han Qiao & Shouyang Wang & John Liu, 2016. "Improving Forecasting Performance by Exploiting Expert Knowledge: Evidence from Guangzhou Port," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(02), pages 387-401, March.
    4. Whitecotton, Stacey M. & Sanders, D. Elaine & Norris, Kathleen B., 1998. "Improving Predictive Accuracy with a Combination of Human Intuition and Mechanical Decision Aids," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 76(3), pages 325-348, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wly:jocnur:v:23:y:2014:i:5-6:p:784-798. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2702 .

    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.