Evidence of anchoring bias in novice (first year) osteopathic French students in the context of the primary respiratory mechanism: A randomized-experimental study

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL International Journal of Osteopathic Medicine Pub Date : 2024-02-23 DOI:10.1016/j.ijosm.2024.100717
Clara Driaï-Allègre , Fanny Coste , Clara Olmière , Marilyne Grinand , Aymeric Le Nohaïc , François Romanet , Géraud Gourjon
{"title":"Evidence of anchoring bias in novice (first year) osteopathic French students in the context of the primary respiratory mechanism: A randomized-experimental study","authors":"Clara Driaï-Allègre ,&nbsp;Fanny Coste ,&nbsp;Clara Olmière ,&nbsp;Marilyne Grinand ,&nbsp;Aymeric Le Nohaïc ,&nbsp;François Romanet ,&nbsp;Géraud Gourjon","doi":"10.1016/j.ijosm.2024.100717","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Cognitive biases appear to be one of the most common causes of incorrect medical diagnosis. It affects students during their training and could persist after post-graduation. This could deteriorate patient care. Among them, anchoring bias can impair haptic perception and lead to a biased diagnosis.</p></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><p>Our study assessed the anchoring bias of first-year osteopathic students by determining whether information regarding the PRM rhythm could influence their haptic perception.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Forty first-year osteopathic students were randomly assigned to three groups. They were given different anchoring values during a PRM rhythm evaluation (3, 10 or 17 movements per minute, mpm). All information were given through video documents. Perceived rhythms were collected before and after anchoring. Wilcoxon and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to compare intra and intergroup values.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Before receiving the anchor, groups significantly (p = 0.105) perceived the same rhythms (11.8 ± 6.6mpm; 20.9 ± 9.9mpm; 18.2 ± 10.6mpm; respectively) with high variance among students. After receiving the anchor, students perceived significantly different rhythms; 3.5 ± 1.7mpm; 11.4 ± 2.8mpm; 16.8 ± 6.6mpm, respectively (p &lt; 0.0001). Variance decreased significantly.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>An anchoring bias might occur among first-year osteopathic students regarding their perception of the PRM rhythm. These results provide insights into the importance of the way of presenting information to students, especially controversial ones. Indeed, the way in which changing the ontological framework can modify the epistemological approach needs to be investigated. This could have implications on a student's clinical diagnosis. Students are encouraged to believe in their haptic ability, but also to use critical thinking.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51068,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Osteopathic Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Osteopathic Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1746068924000105","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Cognitive biases appear to be one of the most common causes of incorrect medical diagnosis. It affects students during their training and could persist after post-graduation. This could deteriorate patient care. Among them, anchoring bias can impair haptic perception and lead to a biased diagnosis.

Objective

Our study assessed the anchoring bias of first-year osteopathic students by determining whether information regarding the PRM rhythm could influence their haptic perception.

Methods

Forty first-year osteopathic students were randomly assigned to three groups. They were given different anchoring values during a PRM rhythm evaluation (3, 10 or 17 movements per minute, mpm). All information were given through video documents. Perceived rhythms were collected before and after anchoring. Wilcoxon and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to compare intra and intergroup values.

Results

Before receiving the anchor, groups significantly (p = 0.105) perceived the same rhythms (11.8 ± 6.6mpm; 20.9 ± 9.9mpm; 18.2 ± 10.6mpm; respectively) with high variance among students. After receiving the anchor, students perceived significantly different rhythms; 3.5 ± 1.7mpm; 11.4 ± 2.8mpm; 16.8 ± 6.6mpm, respectively (p < 0.0001). Variance decreased significantly.

Conclusion

An anchoring bias might occur among first-year osteopathic students regarding their perception of the PRM rhythm. These results provide insights into the importance of the way of presenting information to students, especially controversial ones. Indeed, the way in which changing the ontological framework can modify the epistemological approach needs to be investigated. This could have implications on a student's clinical diagnosis. Students are encouraged to believe in their haptic ability, but also to use critical thinking.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
初级呼吸机制背景下骨科法国新手(一年级)学生锚定偏差的证据:随机实验研究
背景认知偏差似乎是造成错误医疗诊断的最常见原因之一。学生在接受培训期间会受到影响,毕业后也可能持续存在。这可能会恶化对病人的护理。我们的研究评估了骨科一年级学生的锚定偏差,确定有关 PRM 节律的信息是否会影响他们的触觉感知。在进行 PRM 节奏评估时,给他们提供不同的锚定值(每分钟 3、10 或 17 个动作,mpm)。所有信息均通过视频文件提供。在锚定前后收集感知节奏。Wilcoxon 检验和 Kruskal-Wallis 检验用于比较组内和组间的数值。结果在接受锚定前,各组对节奏的感知明显相同(p = 0.105)(分别为 11.8 ± 6.6mpm;20.9 ± 9.9mpm;18.2 ± 10.6mpm;),但学生之间的差异很大。接受锚后,学生感知到的节奏明显不同:分别为 3.5 ± 1.7mpm;11.4 ± 2.8mpm;16.8 ± 6.6mpm(p < 0.0001)。结论 一年级骨科学生对 PRM 节奏的感知可能存在锚定偏差。这些结果让我们了解到向学生展示信息(尤其是有争议的信息)的方式的重要性。事实上,改变本体论框架可以改变认识论方法,这一点需要研究。这可能会对学生的临床诊断产生影响。鼓励学生相信自己的触觉能力,同时也要运用批判性思维。
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 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
36.80%
发文量
42
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Osteopathic Medicine is a peer-reviewed journal that provides for the publication of high quality research articles and review papers that are as broad as the many disciplines that influence and underpin the principles and practice of osteopathic medicine. Particular emphasis is given to basic science research, clinical epidemiology and health social science in relation to osteopathy and neuromusculoskeletal medicine. The Editorial Board encourages submission of articles based on both quantitative and qualitative research designs. The Editorial Board also aims to provide a forum for discourse and debate on any aspect of osteopathy and neuromusculoskeletal medicine with the aim of critically evaluating existing practices in regard to the diagnosis, treatment and management of patients with neuromusculoskeletal disorders and somatic dysfunction. All manuscripts submitted to the IJOM are subject to a blinded review process. The categories currently available for publication include reports of original research, review papers, commentaries and articles related to clinical practice, including case reports. Further details can be found in the IJOM Instructions for Authors. Manuscripts are accepted for publication with the understanding that no substantial part has been, or will be published elsewhere.
期刊最新文献
Osteopathic manual treatment in women with endometriosis: A scoping review on clinical symptoms, fertility and quality of life The effectiveness of neuromuscular spinal manipulation- an updated systematic review and meta-analysis Osteopathic treatment of a person with Arnold-Chiari malformation and Syringomyelia: A case report Is visceral osteopathy therapy effective? A systematic review and meta-analysis Professional skill priorities: Comparison views of osteopathy industry professionals and osteopathy students
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1