Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39318846›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of the Canadian Chiropractic Association2024

Exploring strategies to improve clinical decision making in a chiropractic office: a case series.

Joshua Plener, Demetry Assimakopoulos, Chadwick Chung, François Hains, Silvano Mior

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of the Canadian Chiropractic Association, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Joshua PlenerDepartment of Clinical Education, Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College, Toronto, ON.
Demetry AssimakopoulosPrivate practice, Vaughan, ON.
Chadwick ChungDepartment of Clinical Education, Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College, Toronto, ON.
François HainsDepartment of Chiropractic, Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières, Trois-Rivières, PQ.
Silvano MiorDepartment of Research and Innovation, Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College, Toronto, ON.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Clinicians make clinical decisions using the dual process theory. The dual process theory comprises two approaches, System 1, based on heuristics, and System 2, involving an analytical and effortful thought process. However, there are inherent limitations to the dual process theory, such as relying on inaccurate memory or misinterpreting cues leading to inappropriate clinical management. As a result, clinicians may utilize mental shortcuts, termed heuristics, and be susceptible to clinical errors and biases that may lead to flawed decision making and diagnosis. Methods: This case series describes four clinical cases whereby the clinicians use distinct strategies to assess and manage complex clinical presentations. Discussion: Through the use of self-reflection and acknowledging diagnostic uncertainty, the clinicians were able to reduce common cognitive biases and provide effective and timely patient care. We discuss strategies that clinicians can implement in their daily practice to improve clinical decision-making processes and deliver quality care.

Indexed as

biaschiropracticclinical decision makingdiagnosisheuristicsmetacognition

Identifiers

PMID39318846
PMCPMC11418796

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.