Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 572

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Knowledge based solution strategies in medical reasoning

Open access
PATEL, V, GROEN, G·1986·Cognitive Science
DOI 10.1016/s0364-0213(86)80010-6
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The techniques of propositionol analysis are used to examine the protocols of seven cardiologists in a task involving the diagnosis of a case of acute bacterial endocarditis and an explanation of its underlying pathophysiology. It is shown that the explanations of physicians making an accurate diagnosis can be accounted for in terms of a model consisting of pure forward reasoning through a network of causal rules, actuated by relevant propositions embedded in the stimulus text. These rules appear to derive from the physician's underlying knowledge base rather than any information in the text itself. In contrast, subjects with inacurate diagnoses tend to make use of a mixture of forward and backward reasoning, beginning with a high level hypothesis and proceeding in a top‐down fashion to the propositions embedded in stimulus text, or to the generation of irrelevant rules.

Overview

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 · 10.1016/s0364-0213(86)80010-6

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

  • Perception in chess

    Chase, W. G., & Simon, H. A. (1973) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/0010-0285(73)90004-2 · Cited by 4,479 · cited 1×

    “Green0 and Simon (in press) suggest that there is a close connection between forward reasoning and the enhanced performance in free recall which was first systematically studied by Chase and Simon (1973) in chess and has since been observed in many other areas.”

  • Medical Problem Solving: An Analysis of Clinical Reasoning

    Elstein, A. S., Shulman, L. S., & Sprafka, S. A. (1978) · doi:10.4159/harvard.9780674189089 · Cited by 1,377 · cited 1×

    “The pioneer work of Elstein, Shulman, and Sprafka (1978) did establish that physicians appear to generate hypotheses (i.e., tentative diagnoses) very early in the process of solving a diagnostic problem and that the number of hypotheses is very limited.”
    Background

Show all 2 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
PATEL, V, & GROEN, G.
Venue
Cognitive Science
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1986-03
Volume
10
Issue
1
Pages
91-116
ISSN
0364-0213 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/s0364-0213(86)80010-6
OpenAlex
W2073573609
Cited by
572
References
2
FWCI
17.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.