Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Diagnosis

Official Journal of the Society to Improve Diagnosis in Medicine (SIDM)

Editor-in-Chief: Graber, Mark L. / Plebani, Mario

Ed. by Argy, Nicolas / Epner, Paul L. / Lippi, Giuseppe / Singhal, Geeta / McDonald, Kathryn / Singh, Hardeep / Newman-Toker, David

Editorial Board: Basso , Daniela / Crock, Carmel / Croskerry, Pat / Dhaliwal, Gurpreet / Ely, John / Giannitsis, Evangelos / Katus, Hugo A. / Laposata, Michael / Lyratzopoulos, Yoryos / Maude, Jason / Sittig, Dean F. / Sonntag, Oswald / Zwaan, Laura

Online
ISSN
2194-802X
See all formats and pricing
More options …

The scientific nature of diagnosis

Bimal Jain
Published Online: 2017-01-13 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/dx-2016-0032

Abstract

The method of diagnosis is essentially similar to the scientific method in which a cause is suspected from clues in a situation and formulated as a hypothesis that is proven correct by the observation of its consequences. An awareness of scientific nature of diagnosis emphasizes search for clues rather than evidence for a disease when we encounter a patient with symptoms.

Keywords: clues; hypothesis; method of diagnosis; observation; scientific method

References

  • 1.

    Whitehead AN. Science and the modern world. New York: Free Press, 1997.Google Scholar

  • 2.

    Feynman RP Mr. Feynman goes to Washington: investigating the space shuttle Challenger disaster, what do you care what other people think. Leighton R, editor. New York: WW Norton & Co., 2001:113–238.Google Scholar

  • 3.

    Jain B. An investigation into method of diagnosis in clinicopathologic Conferences (CPCs). Diagnosis 2016;3:61–4.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • 4.

    Singh H, Giardina TD, Meyer AN, Forjuoh SN, Reis MD, Thomas EJ. Types and origins of diagnostic errors in primary care settings. JAMA Intern Med 2013;173:418–25.PubMedWeb of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 5.

    Ely LW, Kaldjian LC, D’Alessandro DM. Diagnostic errors in primary care: lessons learned. J Am Board Fam Med 2012;25:85–97.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • 6.

    Croskerry P. The importance of cognitive errors in diagnosis and strategies to minimize them. Acad Med 2003;78:775–80.PubMedCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • 7.

    Popper K. Conjectures and refutations: the growth of scientific knowledge (Routledge Classics), 2nd ed. London: Routledge, 2002.Google Scholar

  • 8.

    Graham DW. Heraclitus. In: Zalta EN, editor. The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy ed., Fall 2015 edition. Available at: https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2015/entries/heraclitus/.

About the article

Received: 2016-08-19

Accepted: 2016-11-01

Published Online: 2017-01-13

Published in Print: 2017-03-01


Author contributions: The author has accepted responsibility for the entire content of this submitted manuscript and approved submission.

Research funding: None declared.

Employment or leadership: None declared.

Honorarium: None declared.

Competing interests: The funding organization(s) played no role in the study design; in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; or in the decision to submit the report for publication.


Citation Information: Diagnosis, Volume 4, Issue 1, Pages 17–19, ISSN (Online) 2194-802X, ISSN (Print) 2194-8011, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/dx-2016-0032.

Export Citation

©2017 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston.Get Permission

Citing Articles

Here you can find all Crossref-listed publications in which this article is cited. If you would like to receive automatic email messages as soon as this article is cited in other publications, simply activate the “Citation Alert” on the top of this page.

[1]
Mark L. Graber, Giuseppe Lippi, and Mario Plebani
Diagnosis, 2018, Volume 5, Number 1, Page 1

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in