Session Details

AM07: Why Don't Physicians Make Rational, Evidence-Based Decisions: Bad Data, Bad Influences, and Wh
(Event: SMDM 41st Annual Meeting: Portland, OR)

Oct 20, 2019 9:00AM - Oct 20, 2019 12:30PM
Session Type: Short Course- AM 1/2 Day

Description
Background
EBM and MDM principles require decisions based on the best evidence from clinical research to maximize individual patients’ benefits and minimize their harms, according to patients’ values. Physicians are exhorted to follow ostensibly evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). However, physicians only sometimes make decisions according to CPGs and attempts to improve physicians’ CPG adherence often fail. Lack of adherence has been attributed to deficient knowledge of the evidence and CPGs, and physicians’ human cognitive limitations. Yet interventions to improve physicians’ decisions by increasing awareness or addressing physicians’ cognition have rarely succeeded. In this course, we will consider alternative explanations. Physicians may respond to extraneous factors, including bad influences intentionally designed to make their decisions serve vested interests. Also, physicians may appropriately resist using CPGs because of legitimate concerns about their evidence base (bad data), the processes used to develop them, and the intentions of their developers.
Course Type
Half Day
CourseLevel
Beginner
Format Requirements
We plan a seminar format including a mixture of didactic presentations and group discussion. Attendees should have basic knowledge of evidence-based medicine and medical decision making principles.
Overview
Evidence-based medicine (EBM) and medical decision making (MDM) principles require decisions based on the best evidence from clinical research to maximize individual patients’ benefits and minimize their harms, according to patients’ values. Physicians thus are exhorted to follow ostensibly evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). However, physicians only sometimes make decisions according to CPGs, and interventions to improve adherence, including those that attempted to improve knowledge or address physicians’ cognitive limitations, have had little effect. We will discuss how bad data and bad influences may thwart true evidence-based, rational decision making, and what might be done to help
Description & Objectives
An illustrative case: physicians failed to adhere to guidelines for management of a common problem. Attempts to improve adherence yielded minimal success. Then, new data suggested that the guidelines were based on bad data. The physicians may have been appropriately skeptical.

Bad Data

Physicians may resist CPGs based on bad data, especially when evidence may have been distorted by vested interests. Distortion may result from manipulations of study design, implementation, and analysis, informed by sophisticated knowledge of clinical epidemiology, to increase likelihood of results that serve study sponsors. When manipulation fails to produce favorable results, studies may be suppressed.

Guideline development may also be distorted. Problems include biased selection of clinical evidence, lack of rigorously critical evidence review, and failure to attend to relevant patient-centered outcomes and patients’ values.

Bad Influences

Deceptive marketing and public relations campaigns may be designed to support their sponsors’ interests. Such campaigns may be based on sophisticated knowledge of principles of propaganda, first espoused by Bernays in US, and of disinformation, as practiced in the former Soviet Union.

Physicians may be influenced by factors that ought to be extraneous to the decision process. These include perverse incentives, such as payments that depend on physicians’ patient management (e.g., additional payments for prescribing specific drugs). They may also be subject to bureaucratic impediments, conflicts of interest, and outright criminal and corrupt activities.

Discussion

We will discuss proposed solutions of some of these problems, as espoused by the Institue of Medicine and watchdog organizations. We will finish with a brain-storming session to develop other solutions and a research agenda.

Objectives

Participants should understand:
- evidence of physicians non-EB decisions
- influences of research manipulation and suppression, distortion of CPGs
- extraneous influences
- proposed solutions to these problems

Description
EBM and MDM principles require decisions based on the best evidence from clinical research to maximize individual patients’ benefits and minimize their harms, according to patients’ values. Physicians are exhorted to follow ostensibly evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). However, physicians only sometimes make decisions according to CPGs and attempts to improve physicians’ CPG adherence often fail. Lack of adherence has been attributed to deficient knowledge of the evidence and CPGs, and physicians’ human cognitive limitations. Yet interventions to improve physicians’ decisions by increasing awareness or addressing physicians’ cognition have rarely succeeded. In this course, we will consider alternative explanations. Physicians may respond to extraneous factors, including bad influences intentionally designed to make their decisions serve vested interests. Also, physicians may appropriately resist using CPGs because of legitimate concerns about their evidence base (bad data), the processes used to develop them, and the intentions of their developers.
Course Director
Course Faculty

  •  
 

  

Session Fees
Fee TypeMember FeeNon-Member Fee
This session is free
Early: $204.00 $332.00
Regular: $250.00 $378.00
Late: $250.00 $378.00
This session is free
Early: $174.00 $174.00
Regular: $220.00 $220.00
Late: $220.00 $220.00

 

Society for Medical Decision Making
136 Everett Road
Albany, NY 12205

info@SMDM.org

Copyright © 2023 - All Rights Reserved

 



© 2024 Community Brands Holdings, LLC. All rights reserved.