How Physicians Use Clinical Information in Diagnosing Pulmonary Embolism

Robert S. Wigton, Vincent L. Hoellerich and Kashinath D. Patil

Medical Decision Making, 1986, vol. 6, issue 1, 2-11

Abstract: To investigate what diagnostic strategies physicians adopt when the literature is unclear about the best use of diagnostic information, the authors examined how physicians weighted eight items of clinical information in diagnosing pulmonary embolism. Thirteen faculty mem bers, 23 house officers, and 19 students estimated the likelihood of pulmonary embolism and predicted whether they would begin treatment in 27 simulated cases. The vignettes were constructed using a fractional factorial design and analyzed using conjoint analysis. Overall the lung scan results (34.7%) and leg examination (19.0%) were weighted most heavily in making the diagnosis, whereas the leg examination (35.7%) was given the greatest weight when deciding about therapy. Weights given by groups at different levels of training were similar, but there was considerable variation within groups. Heterogeneity of diagnostic strategies did not appear to decrease in groups with more training and experience. Multi variate analysis of predictors of pulmonary embolism in 102 actual cases showed that al though lung scan results were important in both actual and simulated cases, heart rate accounted for the most variance in the actual cases but was hardly used in the physicians' strategies. There is considerable variation among physicians in how clinical information is used in diagnosing pulmonary embolism, and the variation may not decrease with increased experience. Key words: conjoint analysis, clinical diagnosis, diagnostic strategies, pulmonary embolism. (Med Decis Making 6:2-11, 1986)

Date: 1986
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X8600600102 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:medema:v:6:y:1986:i:1:p:2-11

DOI: 10.1177/0272989X8600600102

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Medical Decision Making
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().