Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41926035›Full record

ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2026

Of Hoofbeats, Horses, and Zebras: A "Conversation" with Drs. William Dock, Theodore Woodward, and Alvan Feinstein.

David A Nardone

Abstract readInterview
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2026. 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

1 author.

David A Nardone(Retired) Clinical Director Primary Care, Portland VA Medical Center, Emeritus Professor, School of Medicine, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA. danardone@icloud.com.ORCID 0000-0002-2506-1550

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

It all began, so they say, with Theodore Woodward, "Don't look for zebras on Greene Street." This aphorism has since been passed on to generations of residents and medical students at the University of Maryland School of Medicine and beyond. A zebra is a "medical condition whose appearance at a particular time and place, in a particular person, is both unexpected and astonishing. The 'condition' may be an item from the history, a physical finding, a laboratory test, or a diagnosis." This maxim nudges clinicians to consider competing or paradoxical hypotheses when assessing patients for common, unexpected, and rare diseases. Whereas errors are unavoidable, considering zebras (uncommon diagnoses) helps avoid "not-to-miss" diagnoses, patient harm, and the associated regret of failure. Perhaps there's also the tug to "bag the big one." On the one hand, pursuing zebras may result in overestimating probability assessments with the potential for harming patients and wasting resources, while applying the science of formal medical decision-analysis lessens the chances of overzealous workups. Unfortunately, conducting studies to evaluate the utility of clinical findings for rare diseases is difficult. The key is to identify symptoms and signs, preferably in combination, with high specificity and sensitivity. On the other hand, assuming horses (common diagnoses) for too long also has its risks. Both the failure to recognize when the current therapeutic plan is ineffective and to appreciate the diagnostic value of the history, physical, and routine laboratory tests can delay the search for alternative hypotheses and ultimately efficacious treatment. Sir William Osler admonished us over a century ago, "Use the knife and cautery to cure the moral necrosis which you will feel in the posterior parietal region, in Gall and Spurzheim's centre of self-esteem, where you will find a sore spot after you have made a mistake in diagnosis."

Indexed as

DiagnosisHumansRare Diseasesaphorisms and maximschagrin and regretclinical problem-solvingdecision-makingformal medical decision-analysishoofbeats, horses, and zebras

Identifiers

PMID41926035
PMCPMC13305089

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.