Diagnostic reasoning is the thought process used to arrive at a diagnosis based on symptoms, examination findings, and laboratory values. Diagnosis is categorized as nonanalytic reasoning (intuition) and analytic reasoning (analysis). Rehabilitation nutrition involves the diagnosis of nutritional disorders, sarcopenia, and excess or deficient nutrient intake. There is usually only one correct answer for the presence or absence of these. On the other hand, there may be no single correct answer for the causes of anorexia, weight loss, or sarcopenia, and analytical reasoning is required. In this case, diagnostic reasoning involves hypotheses. Simply using nutritional supplements without performing diagnostic reasoning about these causes is like prescribing antipyretic analgesics to a patient with a headache without diagnosing the cause of the headache. To maximize function and quality of life in rehabilitation nutrition, it is necessary to suspect the common causes of anorexia, weight loss, and sarcopenia in all cases.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
|---|---|
| http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9249927 | PMC |
| http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jgf2.549 | DOI Listing |
Publication Analysis
Top Keywords
Similar Publications
Technology and Dementia Preconference.
Alzheimers Dement
December 2024
Tilburg University, Tilburg, Netherlands.
Background: Developing culture-fair tests that measure constructs equivalently across different ethno-lingual groups is challenging, given the diverse cultural variations that impact neurocognitive measurement. Multi-level measurement invariance must be established before interpreting scores similarly across groups, both within and between cultures for meaningful comparisons.
Method: We set out to test whether a neurocognitive tool (BENCI) behaves the same way across the males (n = 311) and the females group (n = 291) using measurement invariance testing with multigroup confirmatory factor analysis.
Developing clinical reasoning along the cognitive continuum: a mixed methods evaluation of a novel Clinical Diagnosis Assessment.
BMC Med Educ
January 2025
Deakin Optometry, School of Medicine, Deakin University, 75 Pigdons Road, Waurn Ponds , VIC, 3216, Australia.
Background: Clinical reasoning is a professional capability required for clinical practice. In preclinical training, clinical reasoning is often taught implicitly, and feedback is focused on discrete outcomes of decision-making. This makes it challenging to provide meaningful feedback on the often-hidden metacognitive process of reasoning to address specific clinical reasoning difficulties.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFA generalist medical language model for disease diagnosis assistance.
Nat Med
January 2025
State Key Laboratory of Networking and Switching Technology, Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications, Beijing, China.
The delivery of accurate diagnoses is crucial in healthcare and represents the gateway to appropriate and timely treatment. Although recent large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive capabilities in few-shot or zero-shot learning, their effectiveness in clinical diagnosis remains unproven. Here we present MedFound, a generalist medical language model with 176 billion parameters, pre-trained on a large-scale corpus derived from diverse medical text and real-world clinical records.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFDistinctive Delta and Theta Responses in Deductive and Probabilistic Reasoning.
Brain Behav
January 2025
Research Institute for Health Sciences and Technologies (SABITA), Neuroscience Research Center, Clinical Electrophysiology, Neuroimaging and Neuromodulation Lab, Istanbul Medipol University, Istanbul, Turkey.
Introduction: The neural substrates of reasoning, a cognitive ability we use constantly in daily life, are still unclear. Reasoning can be divided into two types according to how the inference process works and the certainty of the conclusions. In deductive reasoning, certain conclusions are drawn from premises by applying the rules of logic.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFObjective: The authors aimed to determine if medical students' self-assessment of abilities and performance differed by gender during the psychiatry clerkship and if these differences were reflected objectively in test scores or clinical evaluations from educators.
Methods: Data from mid-clerkship self-assessments completed during the psychiatry core clerkship were reviewed from two classes of medical students. Students rated their performance on 14 items across five domains: knowledge/clinical reasoning, differential diagnosis, data presentation, studying skills, and teamwork as "below," "at," or "above expected level.
Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!