Great read. Now I have an article to point to when trying to explain bayesian reasoning to peers! A big part of bayesians thinking, which you mention, is that this is done unconsciously all the time. We're all bayesians - some of us just like to admit it and use it with a little more intentionality.
As you describe, the whole clinician encounter (from chart review before you meet the patient to lab values later down the road) is an exercise in bayesian reasoning. Certainly rings true for me.
Thank you for this article! Sorry, I'm coming to it a couple months late. I'm an FY2 doctor in GP at the moment, and I've been really struggling with the cognitive load of seeing even just 10 patients a day (compared to GPs who see double/triple). This article has put into context why this is so difficult - I'm trying to perform Bayesian inference 10+ times a day, for multiple presenting complaints, without having the experience and exposure to enough patients to be confident in my inputs. I think another thing that is difficult in GP, as with all of medicine, is filtering through all the extraneous info you get (or in my case, sometimes that I request) and figuring out which of this information is relevant to my overall assessment of this person and to the things I consider when performing the Bayesian inference calculation. Does this person's longstanding hair loss that they're telling me about have anything to do with their abdo pain? Does the ever-so-slightly raised calcium explain their fatigue, or is the fatigue related to their other, known, rheumatological condition? Do I need to worry here, or do I not? I hope this is something that will get easier with time. Thanks again for the article :)
Thanks for sharing this! It is similar to my own experience working in GP and as an FY doctor. Even knowing which 'abnormal' bloods need to be actioned and which can be safely ignored is a skill that comes with experience.
I think this sifting of potentially relevant clinical information is something that is not well recognised by those who have not worked as doctors. And General Practice deals with the highest load of this information! I'm sure it will get easier with time, as it does for all of us.
Great read. Now I have an article to point to when trying to explain bayesian reasoning to peers! A big part of bayesians thinking, which you mention, is that this is done unconsciously all the time. We're all bayesians - some of us just like to admit it and use it with a little more intentionality.
Thanks Douglas - I think this perspective does ring true for clinicians, right?
As you describe, the whole clinician encounter (from chart review before you meet the patient to lab values later down the road) is an exercise in bayesian reasoning. Certainly rings true for me.
Thank you for this article! Sorry, I'm coming to it a couple months late. I'm an FY2 doctor in GP at the moment, and I've been really struggling with the cognitive load of seeing even just 10 patients a day (compared to GPs who see double/triple). This article has put into context why this is so difficult - I'm trying to perform Bayesian inference 10+ times a day, for multiple presenting complaints, without having the experience and exposure to enough patients to be confident in my inputs. I think another thing that is difficult in GP, as with all of medicine, is filtering through all the extraneous info you get (or in my case, sometimes that I request) and figuring out which of this information is relevant to my overall assessment of this person and to the things I consider when performing the Bayesian inference calculation. Does this person's longstanding hair loss that they're telling me about have anything to do with their abdo pain? Does the ever-so-slightly raised calcium explain their fatigue, or is the fatigue related to their other, known, rheumatological condition? Do I need to worry here, or do I not? I hope this is something that will get easier with time. Thanks again for the article :)
Thanks for sharing this! It is similar to my own experience working in GP and as an FY doctor. Even knowing which 'abnormal' bloods need to be actioned and which can be safely ignored is a skill that comes with experience.
I think this sifting of potentially relevant clinical information is something that is not well recognised by those who have not worked as doctors. And General Practice deals with the highest load of this information! I'm sure it will get easier with time, as it does for all of us.