Towards safer diagnosis in clinical practice – understanding and using diagnostic tests in the neonatal unit more appropriately

The diagnostic process is a complex task that is more often than not done inherently by clinicians. However, it is in fact based around quantitative risk assessment and, as a result, when done intuitively is open to a significant risk of bias. By adopting a more structured and quantitative approach...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Seminars in fetal & neonatal medicine 2005-02, Vol.10 (1), p.83-90
Main Author: Fowlie, Peter W.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Clinical Competence - standards
Decision making
Diagnosis
Diagnostic test
Diagnostic Tests, Routine - standards
Evidence-based medicine
Female
Humans
Infant
Infant, Newborn
Intensive Care Units, Neonatal - standards
Intensive Care, Neonatal - standards
Laboratory techniques and procedures
Neonatology - standards
Newborn
Pregnancy
Quality control
Risk Management
United Kingdom
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The diagnostic process is a complex task that is more often than not done inherently by clinicians. However, it is in fact based around quantitative risk assessment and, as a result, when done intuitively is open to a significant risk of bias. By adopting a more structured and quantitative approach to diagnosis, clinicians might be in a position to make better diagnostic decisions. To achieve this, explicit recognition about the uncertainty surrounding diagnosis and knowledge about the basic properties of diagnostic tests, including disease incidence and predictive values, is necessary, as well as some consideration of newer concepts such as ‘action thresholds’. Examples from everyday neonatal practice illustrate the potential clinical risks associated with the inappropriate use and interpretation of diagnostic tests and the potential benefits of approaching diagnosis in a more robust manner. A number of tools are now readily available to help clinicians move towards more ‘evidence-based’ diagnosis.
ISSN:1744-165X
1878-0946
DOI:10.1016/j.siny.2004.09.002