CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 80Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic SkillsDecision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsPatient Safety and Medication Errors

Believing in Overcoming Cognitive Biases

Open access
Tiffany S. Doherty, Aaron E. Carroll·2020·AMA Journal of Ethics
DOI 10.1001/amajethics.2020.773
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Like all humans, health professionals are subject to cognitive biases that can render diagnoses and treatment decisions vulnerable to error. Learning effective debiasing strategies and cultivating awareness of confirmation, anchoring, and outcomes biases and the affect heuristic, among others, and their effects on clinical decision making should be prioritized in all stages of education.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/amajethics.2020.773

Cites

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Despite concerted efforts involving educational strategies, optimal work environments, and a culture promoting bias awareness and correction, the eradication of these biases remains an elusive goal.

    “Despite concerted efforts involving educational strategies, optimal work environments, and a culture promoting bias awareness and correction [5,6], the eradication of these biases remains an elusive goal.”

    From Mitigating cognitive biases in clinical decision-making through multi-agent conversations using large language models: simulation study (2024) · cites this paper as [5]

    The Metacognition and Clinical Decision Making section recommends education and awareness to reduce bias and describes working conditions that make analytical thinking difficult. The Conclusion likewise advocates sustained training. The paper does not establish that concerted efforts have already provided optimal work environments or a culture of bias correction; the sentence's claim about elusive eradication follows the citation rather than being clearly attributed to it. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • In time-critical decision making, providers may look for and prioritize evidence that supports their initial decisions instead of seeking evidence that challenges these decisions.

    “In time-critical decision making, providers may look for and prioritize evidence that supports their initial decisions instead of seeking evidence that challenges these decisions (e.g., anchoring and confirmation biases) [19, 22].”

    From To Recommend or Not to Recommend: Designing and Evaluating AI-Enabled Decision Support for Time-Critical Medical Events (2025) · cites this paper as [22]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Croskerry P, Stephen M, Cosby K, Wears R. Critical Thinking and Reasoning in Emergency Medicine. Philadelphia, PA: Wolters Kluwer/Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2008.
  2. Aaron E. Carroll, MD, MS is a professor of Pediatrics and the associate Dean for Research Mentoring at Indiana University School of Medicine in Indianapolis. He is also the vice president for faculty development at the Regenstrief Institute. His primary interests are health services research and pediatric outcomes. Citation AMA J Ethics. 2020;22(9):E773-778. DOI 10.1001/amajethics.2020.773.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Doherty, T. S., & Carroll, A. E.
Affiliations
Indiana University School of Medicine (US)
ORCID
Aaron E. Carroll
Venue
AMA Journal of Ethics
Publisher
American Medical Association (AMA)
Published
2020-09-01
Volume
22
Issue
9
Pages
E773-778
ISSN
  • 1937-7010 (ISSN-L)
  • 2376-6980
DOI
10.1001/amajethics.2020.773
OpenAlex
W3082867747
Cited by
80
References
23
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 3
FWCI
5.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The AMA Journal of Ethic (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • IUScholarWorks (Indiana University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Emergency Medical Services › Patient Safety and Medication Errors
Keywords
cognitive biases, debiasing strategies, clinical decision-making, confirmation bias, anchoring effect, outcome bias, affect heuristic, diagnostic errors, medical education, healthcare workers
MeSH terms
Clinical Decision-Making, Heuristics, Cognition, Decision Making, Humans, Bias

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review