Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of cancerrelated death worldwide [1]. CRC is amenable to early detection with earlier diagnosis improving prognosis [2-4]. Like many regions around the world, Canadian provincial screening programs use fecal occult blood tests (FOBTs)-guaiac or immunochemical, depending on the province-as the initial CRC screening test [5]. When FOBTs are positive (FOBT+), colonoscopy is required for a definitive CRC diagnosis [6]. Delays in obtaining follow-up colonoscopy increase the risk of CRC, including advanced-stage disease [7, 8], while non-adherence considerably increases the risk of CRC death [9]. Timely receipt of follow-up colonoscopy is therefore critical to reducing the burden of CRC at the population level. Colon Cancer Check (CCC) is Ontario's organized CRC screening program and Canada's largest CRC screening program, serving just over 4 million eligible individuals [6]. CCC recommends biennial guaiac FOBT (Hema-Screen, Immunostics Inc., NJ, USA) for persons ages 50-74 at average CRC risk [10]. Primary care providers (PCPs) facilitate screening by dispensing FOBT kits, receiving test results and arranging follow-up colonoscopy for persons with FOBT + results. While a follow-up colonoscopy rate of 85-90%
According to the dual process model of reasoning, physicians make diagnostic decisions using two mental systems: System 1, which is rapid, unconscious, and intuitive, and System 2, which is slow, rational, and analytical. Currently, little is known about physicians' use of System 1 or intuitive reasoning in practice. In a qualitative study of clinical reasoning, physicians were asked to tell stories about times when they used intuitive reasoning while working up an acutely unwell patient, and we combine socio-narratology and rhetorical theory to analyze physicians' stories. Our analysis reveals that in describing their work, physicians draw on two competing narrative structures: one that is aligned with an evidence-based medicine approach valuing System 2 and one that is aligned with cooperative decision making involving others in the clinical environment valuing System 1. Our findings support an understanding of clinical reasoning as distributed, contextual, and influenced by professional culture.
Background Diagnostic intuition is a rapid, non-analytic, unconscious mode of reasoning. A small body of evidence points to the ubiquity of intuition, and its usefulness in generating diagnostic hypotheses and ascertaining severity of illness. Little is known about how experienced physicians understand this phenomenon, and how they work with it in clinical practice. Methods Descriptions of how experienced physicians perceive their use of diagnostic intuition in clinical practice were elicited through interviews conducted with 30 physicians in emergency, internal and family medicine. Each participant was asked to share stories of diagnostic intuition, including times when intuition was both correct and incorrect. Multiple coders conducted descriptive analysis to analyze the salient aspects of these stories. Results Physicians provided descriptions of what diagnostic intuition is, when it occurs and what type of activity it prompts. From stories of correct intuition, a typology of four different types of intuition was identified: Sick/Not Sick, Something Not Right, Frame-shifting and Abduction. Most physician accounts of diagnostic intuition linked this phenomenon to non-analytic reasoning and emphasized the importance of experience in developing a trustworthy sense of intuition that can be used to effectively engage analytic reasoning to evaluate clinical evidence. Conclusions The participants recounted myriad stories of diagnostic intuition that alerted them to unusual diagnoses, previous diagnostic error or deleterious trajectories. While this qualitative study can offer no conclusions about the representativeness of these stories, it suggests that physicians perceive clinical intuition as beneficial for correcting and advancing diagnoses of both common and rare conditions.
Little is known about the intellectual journey of advanced undergraduates engaged in the research process. Moreover, few studies of this population of library users include students' personal essays as a point of analysis in their scholarly pursuits. To gain insights into the research trajectory of apprentice researchers at the University of Michigan, the Library examined the personal essays that students submitted for its inaugural undergraduate research award. These essays chronicled students' intellectual growth and development throughout the research process. Drawing on observations about the unique needs of these students, the authors analyze the implications for library instruction and services.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.