Interventions to Mitigate Cognitive Biases in the Decision Making of Eye Care Professionals: A Systematic Review

Abstract

SIGNIFICANCE Cognitive biases, systematic errors in thinking that impact a person's choices and judgments, can influence decision making at various points during patient care provision. These biases can potentially result in misdiagnoses, delayed clinical care, and/or patient mismanagement. A range of interventions exists to mitigate cognitive biases. There is a need to understand the relative efficacy of these interventions within the context of eye care practice. PURPOSE The aim of this systematic review was to synthesize the evidence relating to interventions for mitigating cognitive biases associated with clinical decision making by eye care professionals. DATA SOURCES Electronic databases (including Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, PsycINFO) were searched from inception to October 2017 for studies investigating interventions intended to mitigate cognitive biases in the clinical decision making of eye care professionals. This review was undertaken in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses reporting guidelines. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA To ensure inclusion of all relevant literature, a wide range of study designs was eligible for inclusion, such as randomized controlled trials, nonrandomized trials, interrupted time series and repeated measures, controlled before-after studies, and qualitative studies that were a component of any of these quantitative study designs. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS Two review authors independently screened titles, abstracts, and full-text articles in duplicate, applying a priori eligibility criteria. RESULTS After screening 2759 nonduplicate records, including full-text screening of 201 articles, no relevant studies were identified. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF FINDINGS Given that cognitive biases can significantly impact the accuracy of clinical decision making and thus can have major effects on clinical care and patient health outcomes, the lack of studies identified in this systematic review indicates a critical need for research within the area of cognitive bias mitigation for decision making within eye care practice.

Decision making biases in the allied health professions: A systematic scoping review

“…The findings highlight a need for further research in professional disciplines outside of psychology, using methods that better reflect real-life healthcare decision making. There is considerable opportunity for future research to explore the types of biases that influence key decisions made by allied health professionals across the spectrum of service delivery, and significant potential for the development of interventions to mitigate their negative impact in clinical practice [8,54,55].…”

Design and use of vignettes to investigate referral decision-making by optometrists

“…Cognitive biases can influence clinical decision-making, but further research is required to understand their influence and resulting mitigations in eye care. 27 Years in practice does not appear to mitigate cognitive bias. 28…”

Identifying provider, patient and practice factors that shape long-term opioid prescribing for cancer pain: a qualitative study of American and Australian providers

“…When these factors predictably deviate from rationality in judgement or decision-making, they can be seen as ‘cognitive bias’ 15. Provider bias is associated with inaccurate diagnosis and suboptimal medical management 16–18. Age, gender, years of practice and specialty of the providers are known factors that impact analgesic prescription 19–22.…”

“…15 Provider bias is associated with inaccurate diagnosis and suboptimal medical management. [16][17][18] Age, gender, years of practice and specialty of the providers are known factors that impact analgesic prescription. [19][20][21][22] In the context of pain, patient race/ethnicity, SES, gender and English proficiency have been identified as risk factors for pain management disparities.…”