Cognitive biases in osteopathic diagnosis: a mixed study among French osteopaths
- PMID: 39784101
- DOI: 10.1515/dx-2024-0144
Cognitive biases in osteopathic diagnosis: a mixed study among French osteopaths
Abstract
Objectives: Although cognitive biases are one of the most frequent causes of diagnostic errors, their influence remains underestimated in allied health professions, especially in osteopathy. Yet, a part of osteopathic clinical reasoning and diagnosis rely on the practitioner's intuition and subjective haptic perceptions. The aim of this study is to highlight links between the cognitive biases perceived by the practitioner to understand cognitive patterns during osteopathic diagnosis, and to suggest debiasing strategies.
Methods: A mixed method based on an explanatory sequential type is used. (QUAN→QUAL). A quantitative cross-sectional survey of 272 French osteopaths and three focus groups including 24 osteopaths were carried out. The quantitative analysis includes multinominal logistic regression models and multiple correspondence analysis. The qualitative analysis is based on the framework method (within thematic analysis) and followed a step-by-step guide (Gale et al.).
Results: Among 19 selected biases, osteopaths feel to be affected by 9.4 ± 0.28 biases (range [1-19], median=9). Some presumed biases would be associated, and socio-demographic (gender, age) and professional (experience and types of practice) factors would modify how practitioners perceive the presence of biases. Main debiasing solutions are supervision and transcultural clinical competences.
Conclusions: Osteopaths believe their diagnosis is impaired by the presence of cognitive biases as observed in clinical reality. Some biases are shared with medical doctors, but others are more specific to osteopaths, such as confirmation bias. To reduce their effect, the practitioner needs to be aware of these cognitive patterns of clinical reasoning, understand the patient and himself better, and use objective tests.
Keywords: clinical reasoning; cognitive bias; cognitive debiasing; decision-making; diagnostic errors; osteopathic diagnosis.
© 2024 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston.
References
-
- Schuwirth, LWT, Durning, SJ, King, SM. Assessment of clinical reasoning: three evolutions of thought. Diagnosis 2020;7:191–6. https://doi.org/10.1515/dx-2019-0096 . - DOI
-
- Rencic, J, Schuwirth, LWT, Gruppen, LD, Durning, SJ. Clinical reasoning performance assessment: using situated cognition theory as a conceptual framework. Diagnosis 2020;7:241–9. https://doi.org/10.1515/dx-2019-0051 . - DOI
-
- Thomson, OP, Petty, NJ, Moore, AP. Clinical decision-making and therapeutic approaches in osteopathy - a qualitative grounded theory study. Man Ther 2014;19:44–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.math.2013.07.008 . - DOI
-
- Croskerry, P. A universal model of diagnostic reasoning. Acad Med 2009;84:1022–8. https://doi.org/10.1097/acm.0b013e3181ace703 . - DOI
-
- Roots, SA, Niven, E, Moran, RW. Osteopaths’ clinical reasoning during consultation with patients experiencing acute low back pain: a qualitative case study approach. Int J Osteopath Med 2016;19:20–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijosm.2015.06.003 . - DOI
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources