Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Medical Decision Making
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Bobbio, M.
Right arrow Articles by Martinez-Caro, D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Bobbio, M.
Right arrow Articles by Martinez-Caro, D.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

Clinical Assessment of the Probability of Coronary Artery Disease

Judgmental Bias from Personal Knowledge

Marco Bobbio, MD

Robert Detrano, MD, PhD

Adrian H. Shandling, MD

Myrvin H. Ellestad, MD

Jayne Clark, RN

Oleh Brezden, BSN, MA

Ana Abecia, MD

Diego Martinez-Caro, MD

Probability estimates of angiographic coronary artery disease made by experienced, board- certified staff cardiologists were compared with those of cardiologists in training (fellows). In addition, estimates made before coronary angiography were compared with those made several months later based on written clinical summaries of 15 items of objective clinical and test data. Cardiologists were asked to estimate the probabilities of coronary artery disease, multivessel disease, and triple-vessel or left main disease. The study population consisted of 510 consecutive patients without valvular disease referred for the first time for coronary angiography to three hospitals. Both staff and fellows consistently overestimated the pre-angiographic probability of coronary artery disease. The probabilities estimated from patient summaries were always significantly lower than the pre-angiographic assessments. Only staff cardiologists reliably assessed the probabilities of coronary artery disease during the second assessment (p < 0.05). Thus, estimates of disease probability based on clinical judgment vary according to the source of information, and these estimates are more accurate when physicians have objective data on hand and do not know the identities of the patients. Key words: judgment; disease probability; disease estimate; coronary artery disease; clinical assessment; value-induced bias. (Med Decis Making 1992;12:197-203)

Medical Decision Making, Vol. 12, No. 3, 197-203 (1992)
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X9201200305
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Med Decis MakingHome page
G. Naglie, M. D. Krahn, D. Naimark, D. A. Redelmeier, and A. S. Detsky
Primer on Medical Decision Analysis: Part 3--Estimating Probabilities and Utilities
Med Decis Making, April 1, 1997; 17(2): 136 - 141.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Med Decis MakingHome page
R. M. Poses
Overestimation and the Representativeness Heuristic: To the Editor
Med Decis Making, August 1, 1993; 13(3): 267 - 267.
[PDF]