Maurice Bernstein writes about how making diagnoses are rarely black and white:
In fact, I think the art really trumps the science itself in most cases. Why do I say that? It is because no two patients are the same and no two same diseases present exactly the same way nor are their courses exactly the same. It is also because lab tests are rarely or ever 100% sensitive and also 100% specific. That means that at times a lab test will miss a disease or will indicate the disease is present but actually it isn’t.
Related posts:
- Diagnosis to chronic disease management
- Are we losing the art of diagnosis?
- Shared decision making
- The value of a cancer diagnosis second opinion
- H1N1 rapid tests: Poor sensitivity
- More brain-dead ideas from the ivory tower
- Prostate surgery
KevinMD.com on Facebook
{ 3 comments }
And yet, clinicians are willing to prostitute themselves out on PI cases and peddle their post hoc ergo propter hoc nonsense regarding not only the diagnosis but also the etiology with a “reasonable degree of medical certainty.”
~Criminallopath~
Anon 12:16A: “reasonable degree of medical certainty.”
-along this vein, there is no implication of absolute certainty, nor 100% precision and accuracy
-REASONABLE clinicians interpret data at hand; assults on this process come from sociopaths and psychopaths out to manipulate the clinician for benefit of their agenda: be it prescription of regulated substances or disability qualification
“assults on this process come from sociopaths and psychopaths out to manipulate the clinician for benefit of their agenda”
I resemble that remark!
-John Edwards
Comments on this entry are closed.