Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 27, 2026

Evidence-based Knowledge Synthesis and Hypothesis Validation: Navigating Biomedical Knowledge Bases via Explainable AI and Agentic Systems
Published on: June 13, 2025
The robustness of medical expertise: clinical case processing by medical experts and subexperts
Remy M J P Rikers1, Henk G Schmidt, Henny P A Boshuizen
1Erasmus University Rotterdam, Department of Psychology, P.O. Box 1738, 3000 DR Rotterdam, The Netherlands. rikers@fsw.eur.nl
Abstract:
Medical specialists confronted with problems in their domain of expertise do not rely on intentional causal reasoning, using explicit principles or rules. Rather, reasoning is an automatic process, using knowledge in an encapsulated mode. Less clear is what happens when medical specialists encounter problems outside their specialties. To shed light on this issue, we asked cardiologists and pulmonologists to evaluate 4 clinical cases, 2 in the domain of cardiology and 2 in pulmonology. Their task was to study, diagnose, recall, and explain the signs and symptoms of the clinical case descriptions. The cardiologists and pulmonologists alike processed cases in their specialties faster and more accurately, but recall and pathophysiological explanations did not reveal significant differences. These results suggest that medical specialists do not process cases outside their specialties in a qualitatively different mode from cases within their specialties.
Related Concept Videos
Clinical Trials
There are four phases in a clinical trial. A phase one...
The Availability Heuristic
Statistical Software for Data Analysis and Clinical Trials
Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast, controlled...
Rapid Identification of Pathogens
