Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36124966›Full record

ArticleMedical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making2023

Are Pathologists Self-Aware of Their Diagnostic Accuracy? Metacognition and the Diagnostic Process in Pathology.

Dayna A Clayton, Megan M Eguchi, Kathleen F Kerr, Kiyofumi Miyoshi, Tad T Brunyé, Trafton Drew, Donald L Weaver, Joann G Elmore

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Defensive medicine in dermatological practice - Dermatopathology as a mirror of structural challenges.Journal der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft = Journal of the German Society of Dermatology : JDDG · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. The effects of gaze-display feedback on medical students' self-monitoring and learning in radiology.Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice · 2024
    Article
  7. 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

8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Dayna A ClaytonDepartment of Medicine, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Megan M EguchiDepartment of Medicine, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Kathleen F KerrDepartment of Biostatistics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6438-9583
Kiyofumi MiyoshiDepartment of Psychology, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Tad T BrunyéCenter for Applied Brain and Cognitive Sciences, Tufts University, Medford, MA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8788-8764
Trafton DrewDepartment of Psychology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Donald L WeaverDepartment of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine, University of Vermont Larner College of Medicine, Burlington, VT, USA.
Joann G ElmoreDepartment of Medicine, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7311-6835
University of California, Los Angeles · USTufts University · USUniversity of Utah · USUniversity of Vermont · USUniversity of Washington · US

Funding

Accuracy in the Diagnosis of Melanoma & the Impact of Double ReadingR01CA151306 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI ELMORE, JOANN G · 2011 to 2015
$4.1M
Accuracy of Breast Pathology and the Impact of Double ReadingR01CA140560 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI ELMORE, JOANN G, WEAVER, DONALD LEE · 2009 to 2013
$3.3M
Reader Accuracy in Pathology Interpretation and Diagnosis: Perception and Cognition (RAPID-PC)R01CA225585 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI ELMORE, JOANN G, WEAVER, DONALD LEE · 2018 to 2022
$3.2M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA140560NCI NIH HHS R01 CA151306NCI NIH HHS R01 CA225585
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMetacognition is a cognitive process that involves self-awareness of thinking, understanding, and performance. This study assesses pathologists' metacognition by examining the association between their diagnostic accuracy and self-reported confidence levels while interpreting skin and breast biopsies.

designWe studied 187 pathologists from the Melanoma Pathology Study (M-Path) and 115 pathologists from the Breast Pathology Study (B-Path). We measured pathologists' metacognitive ability by examining the area under the curve (AUC), the area under each pathologist's receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve summarizing the association between confidence and diagnostic accuracy. We investigated possible relationships between this AUC measure, referred to as metacognitive sensitivity, and pathologist attributes. We also assessed whether higher metacognitive sensitivity affected the association between diagnostic accuracy and a secondary diagnostic action such as requesting a second opinion.

resultsWe found no significant associations between pathologist clinical attributes and metacognitive AUC. However, we found that pathologists with higher AUC showed a stronger trend to request secondary diagnostic action for inaccurate diagnoses and not for accurate diagnoses compared with pathologists with lower AUC. LIMITATIONS: Pathologists reported confidence in specific diagnostic terms, rather than the broader classes into which the diagnostic terms were later grouped to determine accuracy. In addition, while there is no gold standard for the correct diagnosis to determine the accuracy of pathologists' interpretations, our studies achieved a high-quality reference diagnosis by using the consensus diagnosis of 3 experienced pathologists.

conclusionsMetacognition can affect clinical decisions. If pathologists have self-awareness that their diagnosis may be inaccurate, they can request additional tests or second opinions, providing the opportunity to correct inaccurate diagnoses. HIGHLIGHTS: Metacognitive sensitivity varied across pathologists, with most showing higher sensitivity than expected by chance.None of the demographic or clinical characteristics we examined was significantly associated with metacognitive sensitivity.Pathologists with higher metacognitive sensitivity were more likely to request additional tests or second opinions for their inaccurate diagnoses.

Indexed as

MetacognitionPathologistsBiopsyBreastHumansPerceptionawarenessbreast pathologycognitive sciencedermatopathologydiagnostic accuracymetacognitive sensitivitysecondary diagnostic actions

Identifiers

PMID36124966
PMCPMC9825636
OpenAlexW4296784790

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.