...
首页> 外文期刊>Western Journal of Emergency Medicine >Accuracy of ‘My Gut Feeling:’ Comparing System 1 to System 2 Decision-Making for Acuity Prediction, Disposition and Diagnosis in an Academic Emergency Department
【24h】

Accuracy of ‘My Gut Feeling:’ Comparing System 1 to System 2 Decision-Making for Acuity Prediction, Disposition and Diagnosis in an Academic Emergency Department

机译:“我的胆量感觉:”系统1与系统2在学术急诊科中进行敏锐度预测,处置和诊断的决策的准确性比较

获取原文

摘要

Introduction: Current cognitive sciences describe decision-making using the dual-process theory, where a System 1 is intuitive and a System 2 decision is hypothetico-deductive. We aim to compare the performance of these systems in determining patient acuity, disposition and diagnosis. Methods: Prospective observational study of emergency physicians assessing patients in the emergency department of an academic center. Physicians were provided the patient’s chief complaint and vital signs and allowed to observe the patient briefly. They were then asked to predict acuity, final disposition (home, intensive care unit (ICU), non-ICU bed) and diagnosis. A patient was classified as sick by the investigators using previously published objective criteria. Results: We obtained 662 observations from 289 patients. For acuity, the observers had a sensitivity of 73.9% (95% CI [67.7-79.5%]), specificity 83.3% (95% CI [79.5-86.7%]), positive predictive value 70.3% (95% CI [64.1-75.9%]) and negative predictive value 85.7% (95% CI [82.0-88.9%]). For final disposition, the observers made a correct prediction in 80.8% (95% CI [76.1-85.0%]) of the cases. For ICU admission, emergency physicians had a sensitivity of 33.9% (95% CI [22.1-47.4%]) and a specificity of 96.9% (95% CI [94.0-98.7%]). The correct diagnosis was made 54% of the time with the limited data available. Conclusion: System 1 decision-making based on limited information had a sensitivity close to 80% for acuity and disposition prediction, but the performance was lower for predicting ICU admission and diagnosis. System 1 decision-making appears insufficient for final decisions in these domains but likely provides a cognitive framework for System 2 decision-making.
机译:简介:当前的认知科学使用双过程理论来描述决策,其中系统1是直观的,系统2是假设推论的。我们旨在比较这些系统在确定患者敏锐度,处置和诊断方面的性能。方法:在学术中心急诊科对急诊医师进行患者评估的前瞻性观察研究。向医生提供了患者的主要主诉和生命体征,并允许其短暂地观察患者。然后要求他们预测敏锐度,最终处置(家庭,重症监护病房(ICU),非ICU病床)和诊断。研究者使用先前公布的客观标准将患者分类为患病。结果:我们从289例患者中获得662项观察结果。观察者的敏锐度为73.9%(95%CI [67.7-79.5%]),特异性83.3%(95%CI [79.5-86.7%]),阳性预测值为70.3%(95%CI [64.1- 75.9%])和阴性预测值85.7%(95%CI [82.0-88.9%])。对于最终处置,观察者对80.8%(95%CI [76.1-85.0%])的病例做出了正确的预测。对于ICU入院,急诊医师的敏感性为33.9%(95%CI [22.1-47.4%]),特异性为96.9%(95%CI [94.0-98.7%])。在可用数据有限的情况下,正确诊断的发生率为54%。结论:基于有限信息的系统1决策对敏锐度和性格预测的敏感性接近80%,但在预测ICU入院和诊断方面的性能较低。系统1决策似乎不足以在这些领域做出最终决策,但可能为系统2决策提供认知框架。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号