Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Evaluating psychodiagnostic decisions.

Cilia L M Witteman1, Clare Harries, Hilary L Bekker

  • 1Behavioural Science Institute, Radboud University, Nijmegen, the Netherlands. c.witteman@socsci.ru.nl

Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice
|February 9, 2007
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Patient Beliefs and Experiences of Adhering to Medical Therapies for Cardiovascular Comorbidities, Before Noncardiac Elective Surgery in South Africa: A Mixed-Methods Study.

Anesthesia and analgesia·2026
Same author

Updated International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS version 5.0): modified Delphi, evidence informed consensus process.

BMJ (Clinical research ed.)·2026
Same author

Development of a Patient Decision Aid for the DAHANCA 35 Proton Radiotherapy Trial: An Iterative Development Process with User-Centered Design Elements.

MDM policy & practice·2026
Same author

Development of 'Location of Dialysis Care in Kidney Life', a service delivery intervention to eliminate unwarranted variation in home dialysis uptake between kidney services and to optimise home dialysis use.

BMC health services research·2026
Same author

Predictive genetic testing in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS): Experiences of decision-making and engagement with UK genetic counseling services.

Journal of genetic counseling·2026
Same author

Assessing the role of peer education in improving clinical and patient-reported outcomes in adults with chronic kidney disease: A scoping review protocol.

PloS one·2026
Same journal

Evaluating Restraint and Seclusion as Care Processes Rather Than Compliance Metrics.

Journal of evaluation in clinical practice·2026
Same journal

Burden in Informal Caregivers of Palliative Care Patients With Pressure Injuries: Perceived Social Support and Influencing Factors Care Burden in Palliative Caregivers.

Journal of evaluation in clinical practice·2026
Same journal

Organisational Problems, Role Stress, and Job Satisfaction Among Emergency Department Workers: A Multicenter Mixed-Effects Study.

Journal of evaluation in clinical practice·2026
Same journal

Highlighting a Systemic Bias in the Responder Odds Ratio.

Journal of evaluation in clinical practice·2026
Same journal

Epistemological Issues in Clinical Reasoning: A Scoping Review.

Journal of evaluation in clinical practice·2026
Same journal

An Evaluation of AI-Generated Clinical Notes in the OpenNotes Era: A Thematic Analysis of Clinician Discourse.

Journal of evaluation in clinical practice·2026
See all related articles

Evaluating only one part of the diagnostic process leads to inaccurate conclusions about clinician decision-making. A comprehensive framework is needed to assess causal explanation for improved clinical decision-making.

Area of Science:

  • Decision Science
  • Clinical Psychology
  • Psychodiagnostics

Background:

  • Existing frameworks for evaluating decision-making often focus on specific aspects or outcomes.
  • Previous evaluations of psychodiagnostic decisions suggest clinicians are poor decision-makers.
  • This perceived deficiency may stem from evaluating only a single component of the diagnostic process.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To critically examine current evaluation methods for psychodiagnostic decision-making.
  • To propose a novel framework for assessing the causal explanation component of diagnosis.
  • To identify tools for evaluating causal explanation in clinical practice.

Main Methods:

  • Analysis of existing evaluation frameworks for decision-making.
  • Critique of normative models (e.g., hypothetico-deductive reasoning) in clinical assessment.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Proposal of a framework for evaluating causal explanation (situation assessment as causal schema, story, or script).

    • Main Results:

    • Current evaluations often compare clinician behavior to idealized normative models, setting unrealistic standards.
    • Subsequent stages of the psychodiagnostic process, such as causal explanation and treatment decisions, are frequently excluded from evaluation.
    • Causal explanation in psychodiagnostics has been largely overlooked in evaluation studies.

    Conclusions:

    • A narrow focus on specific decision-making aspects or outcomes provides an incomplete picture of diagnostic performance.
    • A comprehensive evaluation must include the causal explanation phase of psychodiagnostics.
    • Developing and utilizing tools to evaluate causal explanation is crucial for achieving clinical excellence.