Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42885772›Full record

ArticleFamily practice2026

Information theory and diagnostic reasoning in primary care: a framework for navigating uncertainty.

Brian H Willis

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Family practice, 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.

Brian H WillisSchool of Health Sciences, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 2TT, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-0821-8624

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This is an overview of how information theory offers a rigorous and intuitive framework for understanding diagnostic reasoning in primary care. Primary care clinicians frequently encounter patients early in their illness trajectory, when symptoms are vague, evolving, or non-specific, creating high diagnostic uncertainty. Information theory, through its core concepts of entropy, information content, and information gain, provides a structured way to quantify this uncertainty and understand how it changes as new clinical information is gathered. Entropy reflects the uncertainty associated with the breadth of the differential diagnosis; information content captures how surprising or discriminating a finding is; and information gain describes how much a particular question, sign, or test reduces uncertainty. Applied to the consultation, these principles explain why rare but specific features are disproportionately informative, why sequences of low-yield tests may add little value, and how targeted history-taking can outperform broad investigation. The framework complements Bayesian reasoning, hypothetico-deductive approaches, and intuitive pattern recognition by clarifying the informational value that underpins each. Through clinical examples, the paper illustrates how information theory sharpens diagnostic strategy, supports efficient use of investigations, and helps clinicians navigate uncertainty with greater clarity and safety. Ultimately, it positions diagnosis as a scientific process of uncertainty reduction central to primary care practice.

Indexed as

Clinical ReasoningInformation TheoryPrimary Health CareBayes TheoremDiagnosis, DifferentialHumansUncertaintyclinical decision-Makingdiagnostic reasoninginformation theoryprimary health care

Identifiers

PMID42885772
PMCPMC13673261

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.