Article Text

PDF
Dual-process cognitive interventions to enhance diagnostic reasoning: a systematic review
  1. Kathryn Ann Lambe1,
  2. Gary O'Reilly2,
  3. Brendan D Kelly3,
  4. Sarah Curristan1
  1. 1School of Psychology, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
  2. 2School of Psychology, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
  3. 3Trinity College Dublin, Trinity Centre for Health Sciences, Tallaght Hospital, Dublin, Ireland
  1. Correspondence to Kathryn Ann Lambe, School of Psychology, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland; lambeka{at}tcd.ie

Abstract

Background Diagnostic error incurs enormous human and economic costs. The dual-process model reasoning provides a framework for understanding the diagnostic process and attributes certain errors to faulty cognitive shortcuts (heuristics). The literature contains many suggestions to counteract these and to enhance analytical and non-analytical modes of reasoning.

Aims To identify, describe and appraise studies that have empirically investigated interventions to enhance analytical and non-analytical reasoning among medical trainees and doctors, and to assess their effectiveness.

Methods Systematic searches of five databases were carried out (Medline, PsycInfo, Embase, Education Resource Information Centre (ERIC) and Cochrane Database of Controlled Trials), supplemented with searches of bibliographies and relevant journals. Included studies evaluated an intervention to enhance analytical and/or non-analytical reasoning among medical trainees or doctors.

Findings Twenty-eight studies were included under five categories: educational interventions, checklists, cognitive forcing strategies, guided reflection, instructions at test and other interventions. While many of the studies found some effect of interventions, guided reflection interventions emerged as the most consistently successful across five studies, and cognitive forcing strategies improved accuracy and confidence judgements. Significant heterogeneity of measurement approaches was observed, and existing studies are largely limited to early-career doctors.

Conclusions Results to date are promising and this relatively young field is now close to a point where these kinds of cognitive interventions can be recommended to educators. Further research with refined methodology and more diverse samples is required before firm recommendations may be made for medical education and policy; however, these results suggest that such interventions hold promise, with much current enthusiasm for new research.

  • Decision making
  • Medical education
  • Cognitive biases
  • Diagnostic errors

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.