Expert consensus on cognitive biases affecting child physical abuse evaluations in pediatric emergency medicine: A modified Delphi study

Katherine A. Harmon , Todd P. Chang , Karen K. Imagawa , Anita R. Schmidt , Phung K. Pham , Alan L. Nager
{"title":"Expert consensus on cognitive biases affecting child physical abuse evaluations in pediatric emergency medicine: A modified Delphi study","authors":"Katherine A. Harmon ,&nbsp;Todd P. Chang ,&nbsp;Karen K. Imagawa ,&nbsp;Anita R. Schmidt ,&nbsp;Phung K. Pham ,&nbsp;Alan L. Nager","doi":"10.1016/j.chipro.2024.100080","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Child abuse causes significant morbidity and mortality, yet the diagnosis can be missed. Little is known regarding which cognitive biases influence diagnostic errors in child abuse evaluations in Pediatric Emergency Medicine (PEM).</div></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To obtain consensus on important cognitive biases that affect accurately diagnosing child physical abuse in the emergency department.</div></div><div><h3>Participants</h3><div>A multidisciplinary expert panel of 15 nationally recognized experts in pediatric emergency medicine or child abuse pediatrics (CAP).</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A modified Delphi study was conducted, including 3 iterative survey rounds of expert opinion and statistical summary of survey responses for an a priori goal of 7–9 cognitive biases. Thirty-two cognitive biases were compiled following review of a sentinel article with corresponding PEM-specific vignettes and definitions. Using a Likert scale, participants rated the importance and frequency of each cognitive bias in physical abuse evaluations. To obtain consensus, the lowest 1/3 of the median importance scores were eliminated for each round. Median frequency scores were used as a tiebreaker between cognitive biases, if required.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Thirteen of 15 (86.6%) experts completed the Delphi process, agreeing on 9 most important cognitive biases in child physical abuse evaluations: anchoring bias, ascertainment bias, confirmation bias, framing bias, fundamental attribution error, outcome bias, premature closure, unpacking principle, and visceral bias. Each cognitive bias received a final median score of 7 for importance.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Understanding the most important cognitive biases in child physical abuse evaluations in PEM may supplement medical education in reducing misdiagnosis of child abuse.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":100237,"journal":{"name":"Child Protection and Practice","volume":"4 ","pages":"Article 100080"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Child Protection and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2950193824000809","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Child abuse causes significant morbidity and mortality, yet the diagnosis can be missed. Little is known regarding which cognitive biases influence diagnostic errors in child abuse evaluations in Pediatric Emergency Medicine (PEM).

Objective

To obtain consensus on important cognitive biases that affect accurately diagnosing child physical abuse in the emergency department.

Participants

A multidisciplinary expert panel of 15 nationally recognized experts in pediatric emergency medicine or child abuse pediatrics (CAP).

Methods

A modified Delphi study was conducted, including 3 iterative survey rounds of expert opinion and statistical summary of survey responses for an a priori goal of 7–9 cognitive biases. Thirty-two cognitive biases were compiled following review of a sentinel article with corresponding PEM-specific vignettes and definitions. Using a Likert scale, participants rated the importance and frequency of each cognitive bias in physical abuse evaluations. To obtain consensus, the lowest 1/3 of the median importance scores were eliminated for each round. Median frequency scores were used as a tiebreaker between cognitive biases, if required.

Results

Thirteen of 15 (86.6%) experts completed the Delphi process, agreeing on 9 most important cognitive biases in child physical abuse evaluations: anchoring bias, ascertainment bias, confirmation bias, framing bias, fundamental attribution error, outcome bias, premature closure, unpacking principle, and visceral bias. Each cognitive bias received a final median score of 7 for importance.

Conclusions

Understanding the most important cognitive biases in child physical abuse evaluations in PEM may supplement medical education in reducing misdiagnosis of child abuse.
专家共识认知偏差影响儿童身体虐待评估在儿科急诊医学:修正德尔菲研究
背景:儿童虐待导致显著的发病率和死亡率,但诊断可能被遗漏。在儿童急诊医学(PEM)中,关于认知偏差影响儿童虐待评估中的诊断错误知之甚少。目的探讨影响急诊儿童身体虐待准确诊断的重要认知偏差。由15名国家认可的儿科急诊医学或儿童虐待儿科(CAP)专家组成的多学科专家小组。方法采用修正德尔菲法,对专家意见进行3轮迭代调查,并对调查结果进行统计汇总,先验目标为7-9个认知偏差。在回顾了一篇带有相应的pem特异性插图和定义的前哨文章后,编制了32种认知偏差。使用李克特量表,参与者对身体虐待评估中每种认知偏差的重要性和频率进行评分。为了获得共识,每轮淘汰重要性中位数得分最低的1/3。如果需要,中位数频率分数被用作认知偏差之间的决定性因素。结果15位专家中有13位(86.6%)完成了德尔菲过程,对儿童身体虐待评价中最重要的9个认知偏差达成一致:锚定偏差、确知偏差、确认偏差、框架偏差、基本归因错误、结果偏差、过早关闭、拆包原则和本能偏差。每一种认知偏差的重要性最终中位数得分为7分。结论了解PEM儿童身体虐待评估中最重要的认知偏差,可作为医学教育的补充,减少虐待儿童的误诊。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信