Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
Published 23 April 2009, doi:10.1136/bmj.b1662
Cite this as: BMJ 2009;338:b1662
Fiona Godlee, editor, BMJ
fgodlee@bmj.com
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
What is it about the process of diagnosis that eludes critical evaluation? Clinicians make millions of diagnoses every day, and making the right one is central to effective treatment and accurate prognosis. Great diagnosticians tend to be forgiven their other human failings, if the television portrayal of rude but brilliant Dr Gregory House is anything to go by (BMJ 2005;330:1090, doi:10.1136/bmj.330.7499.1090), which suggests that much of the prestige of medicine is bound up with the ability to diagnose. Yet we know surprisingly little about the thought processes behind successful diagnosis.
A new series launched this week aims to encourage clearer thinking about diagnosis. Carl Heneghan and colleagues have used their own experience in primary care to articulate a range of diagnostic strategies used by general practitioners in routine consultations (doi:10.1136/bmj.b946). In a linked article, Matthew Thompson and colleagues explore the use of "restricted rule-out" as
![]()
CiteULike
Complore
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Reddit
StumbleUpon
Technorati What's this?
Read all Rapid Responses