Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.
Wide variations in antibiotic prescribing for otitis media have suggested the need to discover the causes of the differences and help doctors reach agreement. Simulated cases–in the form of written clinical data extracts based on real patients–were used to study the diagnostic and prescribing behaviour of a group of six general practitioners. Clinical judgement analysis was used to model the way in which doctors diag nosed otitis media and their policy for using antibiotics. Most doctors performed consistently and their judgements could be fitted well to models using a small number of symptoms and signs. These models often differed from the policy they believed they were operating. This information was used as process feedback in a group discussion to help improve agreement within the practice on the management of otitis media. Some of the variation in behaviour observed at the start of the study was reduced by significant changes in that of the trainee. Other doctors changed little and some were sceptical of the validity of the experimental methods. The prospects for and difficulties of this type of analysis are discussed.
Family Practice – Oxford University Press
Published: Dec 1, 1985
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.