Understanding Cognitive Errors in Clinical Decision-Making: A Q Methodology Approach Publisher Pubmed

Summary: Why do diagnostic mistakes differ among students? A study tentatively identified eight reasoning-error profiles, suggesting tailored training may help. #MedicalEducation #Diagnosis

Zangooeidovvom S ; Jokar F ; Omid A
Source: BMC Medical Education Published:2026

Abstract

Background: Diagnostic errors are a significant cause of patient harm and legal issues in medicine, with the majority being cognitive in nature. This study aimed to explore the key elements that define these cognitive error styles among pediatric medical trainees (including interns, residents, and fellows). We specifically focused on characteristics of the decision maker that have not been adequately described previously in the literature but are highly relevant to clinical decision making (CDM). Methods: Using Q-methodology, a research approach that combines qualitative and quantitative techniques to study human subjectivity, we examined the personal profiles of trainees regarding cognitive errors. Through a systematic analysis of 58 statements sorted by 48 participants from a pediatric referral hospital in Isfahan, Iran, we identified eight distinct patterns of cognitive error. These eight factors accounted for 66%of the variance in perspectives. Results: Eight distinct cognitive error profiles were tentatively identified among the participants. The profiles were labeled as “Pressure & Authority-Driven Reasoner” (19%), “Self-Oriented Reasoner” (13%), “Prototype-Driven Matcher” (10%), “Fear- and Pressure-Anchored Ignoring” (7%), “Availability- and Experience-Based Reasoner” (6%), “Premature Closure Satisficing Reasoner” (5%), “Diagnostic Momentum with Selective Cue Rejection” (4%), and “Anchoring-Driven Diagnostic Rigidity” (4%). Preliminary observations suggest the “Availability and Authority-Deference” profile may be more associated with younger participants, while some experienced students were associated with the “Anchored and Stubborn” profile. Conclusions: These findings tentatively indicate that diagnostic errors arise from diverse, interacting cognitive styles and personality characteristics rather than uniform deficits in knowledge. Identifying distinct diagnostic reasoning profiles highlights the need for developmentally informed educational strategies. © The Author(s) 2026.