ReviewIrish journal of medical science2020
Medicine and heuristics: cognitive biases and medical decision-making.
Review in Irish journal of medical science, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
53 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Psychological Factors That Contribute to the Use of Video Consultations in Health Care: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Pooled it
- Pooled it
- A pragmatic, single-arm clinical trial of a dose modification algorithm for preventing cytopenia-related delays during FOLFOX chemotherapy.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025Trial
- Association Between Racial Segregation of Labor and Delivery Services and Utilization of Trial of Labor and Vaginal Birth After Cesarean.Obstetrics and gynecology · 2026Observational
- Clarifying the muddle: towards a comprehensive taxonomy of cognitive biases in medicine.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2026Article
- Designing the work week in healthcare: a systems agenda for safer, sustainable work.BMJ open quality · 2026Review
- Doctors vs. Algorithms: Physicians, too, struggle to learn from evidence that contradicts AI suggestions.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- Validating large language model-assisted data extraction from clinical notes.ESMO real world data and digital oncology · 2026Article
- Exploring confusion with antibiotic identification at the community level in six low-and-middle-income countries across Asia and Africa.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Understanding cognitive errors in clinical decision-making: a Q methodology approach.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Association of MoCA-measured cognitive functions with decision-making capacity in older adults with cognitive impairment.BMC geriatrics · 2026Article
- Disagreement between human and AI evaluation of treatment plans.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Life-threatening tracheal leiomyoma presenting as acute respiratory failure masquerading as refractory asthma: A case report.Respiratory medicine case reports · 2026Article
- Clinical myths in dental bleaching: an evidence-based structured narrative review.Brazilian oral research · 2026Review
- Teaching common cognitive biases and associated errors in veterinary neurologic diagnosis using clinical vignettes: a narrative review.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2026Review
- Revisiting the therapeutic threshold in tuberculosis Care: Lessons from Southern Africa's dual-method approach.Journal of clinical tuberculosis and other mycobacterial diseases · 2025Article
- Migraine and Trauma-Informed Care: A Review of the Literature and Recommendations for Clinical Practice and Research.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2025Review
- Consensus on the clinical utility of digital mobility outcomes for personalized clinical decision support in parkinson's disease.Neurological research and practice · 2025Article
- Decision-Making for Endovascular Thrombectomy in Patients With Large Vessel Occlusions and Mild Neurological Deficit: A Consensus Statement.Journal of stroke · 2025Review
- Estimation of therapeutic threshold for tuberculosis using adapted nominal group technique and clinical vignettes in clinical and community settings in Southern Africa.Journal of clinical tuberculosis and other mycobacterial diseases · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionClinical decision-making is a daily practice conducted by medical practitioners, yet the processes surrounding it are poorly understood. The influence of 'shortcuts' in clinical decision-making, known as heuristics, remains unknown. This paper explores heuristics and the valuable role they play in medical practice, as well as offering potential solutions to minimize the risk of incorrect decision-making.
methodThe quasi-systematic review was conducted according to modified PRISMA guidelines utilizing the electronic databases Medline, Embase and Cinahl. All English language papers including bias and the medical profession were included. Papers with evidence from other healthcare professions were included if medical practitioners were in the study sample. DISCUSSION: The most common decisional shortcuts used in medicine are the Availability, Anchoring and Confirmatory heuristics. The Representativeness, Overconfidence and Bandwagon effects are also prevalent in medical practice. Heuristics are mostly positive but can also result in negative consequences if not utilized appropriately. Factors such as personality and level of experience may influence a doctor's use of heuristics. Heuristics are influenced by the context and conditions in which they are performed. Mitigating strategies such as reflective practice and technology may reduce the likelihood of inappropriate use.
conclusionIt remains unknown if heuristics are primarily positive or negative for clinical decision-making. Future efforts should assess heuristics in real-time and controlled trials should be applied to assess the potential impact of mitigating factors in reducing the negative impact of heuristics and optimizing their efficiency for positive outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32409947What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.