Probabilistic reasoning and clinical decision-making: do doctors overestimate diagnostic probabilities?

BACKGROUND The "threshold approach" is based on a physician's assessment of the likelihood of a disease expressed as a probability. The use of Bayes' theorem to calculate disease probability in patients with and without a particular characteristic, may be hampered by the presence of subadditivity (i.e. the sum of probabilities concerning a single case scenario exceeding 100%). AIM To assess the presence of subadditivity in physicians' estimations of probabilities and the degree of concordance among doctors in their probability assessments. DESIGN Prospective questionnaire. METHODS Residents and trained physicians in Family Medicine, Internal Medicine and Cardiology (n = 84) were asked to estimate the probability of each component of the differential diagnosis in a case scenario describing a patient with chest pain. RESULTS Subadditivity was exhibited in 65% of the participants. The total sum of probabilities given by each participant ranged from 44% to 290% (mean 137%). There was wide variability in the assignment of probabilities for each diagnostic possibility (SD 16-21%). DISCUSSION The finding of substantial subadditivity, coupled with the marked discordance in probability estimates, questions the applicability of the threshold approach. Physicians need guidance, explicit tools and formal training in probability estimation to optimize the use of this approach in clinical practice.

[1]  T Reynolds.  Disease Prediction Models Aim To Guide Medical Decision Making , 2001, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[2]  G. Chapman,et al.  [Medical decision making]. , 1976, Lakartidningen.

[3]  D. Koehler,et al.  Probability judgment in three-category classification learning. , 2000, Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory and Cognition.

[4]  S. Hayden,et al.  Likelihood ratio: A powerful tool for incorporating the results of a diagnostic test into clinical decisionmaking. , 1999, Annals of Emergency Medicine.

[5]  J. Kassirer,et al.  The threshold approach to clinical decision making. , 1980, The New England journal of medicine.

[6]  L. Boccardi,et al.  [Chest pain in women: a multicenter study of the National Association of Hospital Cardiologists (ANMCO) of the Lazio Region]. , 2002, Italian heart journal. Supplement : official journal of the Italian Federation of Cardiology.

[7]  K McPherson,et al.  Clinical decision-making. , 1980, Social science & medicine. Medical economics.

[8]  K. Fiedler,et al.  Two halfs may be more than one whole : category-split effects on frequency illusions , 1994 .

[9]  G. Guyatt,et al.  Users' guides to the medical literature. III. How to use an article about a diagnostic test. B. What are the results and will they help me in caring for my patients? The Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. , 1994, JAMA.

[10]  M. Wildner,et al.  In memory of William of Occam , 1999, The Lancet.

[11]  D A Redelmeier,et al.  Probability judgement in medicine: discounting unspecified possibilities. , 1995, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[12]  G. Riecker,et al.  [Principles of medical decision making]. , 1993, Medizinische Klinik.

[13]  G H Guyatt,et al.  Users' guides to the medical literature: XXII: how to use articles about clinical decision rules. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. , 2000, JAMA.

[14]  G. Diamond,et al.  Analysis of probability as an aid in the clinical diagnosis of coronary-artery disease. , 1979, The New England journal of medicine.

[15]  G. Diamond,et al.  Computer-assisted diagnosis in the noninvasive evaluation of patients with suspected coronary artery disease. , 1983, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[16]  D. Berman,et al.  Application of conditional probability analysis to the clinical diagnosis of coronary artery disease. , 1980, The Journal of clinical investigation.

[17]  A. Tversky,et al.  Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases , 1974, Science.

[18]  C. Nienaber,et al.  Clinical prediction of acute aortic dissection. , 2000, Archives of internal medicine.

[19]  A. Tversky,et al.  Support theory: A nonextensional representation of subjective probability. , 1994 .

[20]  Rami Zwick,et al.  Comparing the calibration and coherence of numerical and verbal probability judgments , 1993 .

[21]  A. Tversky,et al.  Heuristics and Biases: Unpacking, Repacking, and Anchoring: Advances in Support Theory , 2002 .

[22]  I. Olivotto,et al.  Effectiveness of a multidisciplinary chest pain unit for the assessment of coronary syndromes and risk stratification in the Florence area. , 2002, American heart journal.

[23]  A. Halkin,et al.  Likelihood ratios: getting diagnostic testing into perspective. , 1998, QJM : monthly journal of the Association of Physicians.

[24]  G. Guyatt,et al.  Users' Guides to the Medical Literature: III. How to Use an Article About a Diagnostic Test: B. What Are the Results and Will They Help Me In Caring for My Patients? , 1994 .