Observational studyBMC medical education2026
Medical student syndrome: a bayesian reasoning failure.
Observational study in BMC medical education, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMedical Student Syndrome (MSS) is often understood as a manifestation of illness anxiety disorder where medical students misinterpret benign symptoms as signs of a serious illness. Current explanations rely heavily on psychological factors; however, these fail to capture the systemic reasoning errors that underly MSS. This paper proposes a mixed model: that MSS results from a combination of the Bayesian reasoning failure of base rate neglect and psychological stressors.
methodsAn observational cross-sectional study of medical students was conducted [Formula: see text]. Participants completed an anonymous survey assessing self-reported MSS, responses to medical diagnostic scenarios modelled on Kahneman and Tversky’s “librarian or farmer” problem, and prioritisation of diagnostic reasoning components. Descriptive statistics and categorical analysis of qualitative responses were performed.
resultsA history of MSS was reported by 56.3% of participants. Diagnostic accuracy was low for both medical scenarios (48.3% correct for differentiating between stroke and migraine; 33.3% for differentiating between pheochromocytoma and panic disorder) and the Bayesian reasoning task (41.1% correct). 71% of students who answered medical questions incorrectly also failed the Bayesian task, suggesting a shared underlying process. 14% of students with a history of MSS answered both questions correctly. Students ranked pathophysiology and symptoms of the presenting complaint as most important in diagnosis, and epidemiology as the least important (mean rank = 8.8/9). Self-analysis of errors showed that most students attributed their mistakes to poor probabilistic reasoning rather than a lack of knowledge.
conclusionThe findings support the explanation of MSS as partially a statistical reasoning error rather than a purely psychological condition. Training in Bayesian reasoning, integration of epidemiology into diagnostic teaching, and diversification of assessment formats may mitigate MSS and enhance diagnostic accuracy for medical students.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.