Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30706302›Full record

ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2019

Practicing Medicine with Colleagues: Pitfalls from Social Psychology Science.

Donald A Redelmeier, Lee D Ross

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Post Hoc Bias in Treatment Decisions.JAMA network open · 2024
    Article
  3. Psychology of envy towards medical colleagues.Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2023
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Donald A RedelmeierDepartment of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada. dar@ices.on.ca.
Lee D RossDepartment of Psychology, Stanford University, Stanford, USA.

Funding

CIHR
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This perspective reviews three pitfalls from psychology science that can distort clinical assessments and contribute to interpersonal conflicts. One pitfall is the illusion that one's own subjective perceptions or judgments are objective observations or interpretations that reasonable colleagues would share. A second pitfall involves self-serving situational attributions rather than disposition attributions for explaining missteps after things go wrong. A third pitfall is confirmation bias that leads to a perseverance of erroneous beliefs, a tendency to mostly seek supportive colleagues, and a failure to check for dissenting viewpoints. An awareness of these three pitfalls may help clinicians improve patient care when practicing with colleagues.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelInterpersonal RelationsPsychology, SocialDissent and DisputesHumansPatient CareSelf Conceptconfirmation biasfallible reasoningillusion of objectivityjudgment and decisionsmedical errorsituational factors

Identifiers

PMID30706302
PMCPMC6445913

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.