Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35860175›Full record

ReviewDialogues in clinical neuroscience2021

Improving clinical decision-making in psychiatry: implementation of digital phenotyping could mitigate the influence of patient's and practitioner's individual cognitive biases.

Stéphane Mouchabac, Ismael Conejero, Camille Lakhlifi, Ilyass Msellek, Leo Malandain, Vladimir Adrien, Florian Ferreri, Bruno Millet, Olivier Bonnot, Alexis Bourla and 1 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Dialogues in clinical neuroscience, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Diagnostic overshadowing in psychiatry: A case report.Indian journal of psychiatry · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Translational chasm and dialogues in clinical neuroscience.Dialogues in clinical neuroscience · 2021
    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

11 authors.

Stéphane MouchabacDepartment of Psychiatry, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Sorbonne Université, AP-HP, Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0002-4226-7956
Ismael ConejeroDepartment of Psychiatry, CHU Nîmes, University of Montpellier, Nîmes, France.
Camille LakhlifiPICNIC lab (Physiological investigation of clinically normal and impaired cognition), Institut du Cerveau - Paris Brain Institute - ICM, Inserm, CNRS, APHP, Hôpital de la Pitié Salpêtrière, Université de Paris, Sorbonne Université, Paris, France.
Ilyass MsellekSorbonne Université, Hôpital de la Pitié Salpêtrière, iCRIN (Infrastructure for Clinical Research In Neurosciences), Brain Institute (ICM), INSERM, CNRS, Paris, France.
Leo MalandainUniversity Hospital Cochin (site Tarnier), Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0003-3888-7690
Vladimir AdrienDepartment of Psychiatry, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Sorbonne Université, AP-HP, Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0001-8035-8843
Florian FerreriDepartment of Psychiatry, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Sorbonne Université, AP-HP, Paris, France.
Bruno MilletSorbonne Université, Hôpital de la Pitié Salpêtrière, iCRIN (Infrastructure for Clinical Research In Neurosciences), Brain Institute (ICM), INSERM, CNRS, Paris, France.
Olivier BonnotDepartment of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, CHU de Nantes, Nantes, France.
Alexis BourlaDepartment of Psychiatry, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Sorbonne Université, AP-HP, Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0003-1438-5733
Redwan MaatougSorbonne Université, Hôpital de la Pitié Salpêtrière, iCRIN (Infrastructure for Clinical Research In Neurosciences), Brain Institute (ICM), INSERM, CNRS, Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0002-1427-2096

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

High stake clinical choices in psychiatry can be impacted by external irrelevant factors. A strong understanding of the cognitive and behavioural mechanisms involved in clinical reasoning and decision-making is fundamental in improving healthcare quality. Indeed, the decision in clinical practice can be influenced by errors or approximations which can affect the diagnosis and, by extension, the prognosis: human factors are responsible for a significant proportion of medical errors, often of cognitive origin. Both patient's and clinician's cognitive biases can affect decision-making procedures at different time points. From the patient's point of view, the quality of explicit symptoms and data reported to the psychiatrist might be affected by cognitive biases affecting attention, perception or memory. From the clinician's point of view, a variety of reasoning and decision-making pitfalls might affect the interpretation of information provided by the patient. As personal technology becomes increasingly embedded in human lives, a new concept called digital phenotyping is based on the idea of collecting real-time markers of human behaviour in order to determine the 'digital signature of a pathology'. Indeed, this strategy relies on the assumption that behaviours are 'quantifiable' from data extracted and analysed through connected tools (smartphone, digital sensors and wearable devices) to deduce an 'e-semiology'. In this article, we postulate that implementing digital phenotyping could improve clinical reasoning and decision-making outcomes by mitigating the influence of patient's and practitioner's individual cognitive biases.

Indexed as

Decision MakingPsychiatryBiasClinical Decision-MakingCognitionHumanscognitive biasDigital phenotypingmedical decision making

Identifiers

PMID35860175
PMCPMC9286737

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.