The majority of bold statements expressed during grand rounds lack scientific merit

Gabor E. Linthorst, Johannes M. A. Daniels, David J. van Westerloo

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

CONTEXT: Frequently, during grand rounds and other medical conferences, bold statements are made regarding 'exotic medical facts'. Such exotic expert opinions are frequently voiced with great conviction and are usually subsequently assimilated by junior staff as medical fact. METHODS: The level of scientific evidence for each exotic expert opinion expressed during daily grand rounds over a 4-month period was evaluated. If, following a short discussion of the statement, any doubt as to the merits of the claim persisted, the person who made the statement was asked to perform a search in the medical literature on the subject. RESULTS: In total, 25 cases of exotic expert opinion were identified during the study period. Of these, 22 statements were made by senior staff and 3 by residents. Careful review of the literature showed only 8 of the statements were actually evidence-based. In 17 cases the available literature actually contradicted the statement (n = 13) or no literature on the subject could be located (n = 4). Although opinions were most often expressed by staff members, the reviews of their merits were more often performed by residents. CONCLUSIONS: The vast majority of exotic expert opinions expressed by senior staff members during grand rounds are not evidence-based. Thus, great care must be taken to ensure that exotic expert opinion is not accepted as factual without careful review. Furthermore, this study shows that although seniority is (as expected) associated with a higher incidence of voicing exotic expert opinion, it is negatively associated with reviewing the merits of such opinion. © 2007 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)965-967
Number of pages3
JournalMedical Education
Volume41
Issue number10
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2007
Externally publishedYes

Cite this

Linthorst, Gabor E. ; Daniels, Johannes M. A. ; van Westerloo, David J. / The majority of bold statements expressed during grand rounds lack scientific merit. In: Medical Education. 2007 ; Vol. 41, No. 10. pp. 965-967.
@article{2f6e84d53d9d4b97a2f9301fb210a3d1,
title = "The majority of bold statements expressed during grand rounds lack scientific merit",
abstract = "CONTEXT: Frequently, during grand rounds and other medical conferences, bold statements are made regarding 'exotic medical facts'. Such exotic expert opinions are frequently voiced with great conviction and are usually subsequently assimilated by junior staff as medical fact. METHODS: The level of scientific evidence for each exotic expert opinion expressed during daily grand rounds over a 4-month period was evaluated. If, following a short discussion of the statement, any doubt as to the merits of the claim persisted, the person who made the statement was asked to perform a search in the medical literature on the subject. RESULTS: In total, 25 cases of exotic expert opinion were identified during the study period. Of these, 22 statements were made by senior staff and 3 by residents. Careful review of the literature showed only 8 of the statements were actually evidence-based. In 17 cases the available literature actually contradicted the statement (n = 13) or no literature on the subject could be located (n = 4). Although opinions were most often expressed by staff members, the reviews of their merits were more often performed by residents. CONCLUSIONS: The vast majority of exotic expert opinions expressed by senior staff members during grand rounds are not evidence-based. Thus, great care must be taken to ensure that exotic expert opinion is not accepted as factual without careful review. Furthermore, this study shows that although seniority is (as expected) associated with a higher incidence of voicing exotic expert opinion, it is negatively associated with reviewing the merits of such opinion. {\circledC} 2007 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.",
keywords = "Attitude of Health Personnel, Clinical Competence/standards, Communication, Internship and Residency/standards, Netherlands, Teaching/methods",
author = "Linthorst, {Gabor E.} and Daniels, {Johannes M. A.} and {van Westerloo}, {David J.}",
year = "2007",
doi = "10.1111/j.1365-2923.2007.02838.x",
language = "English",
volume = "41",
pages = "965--967",
journal = "Medical Education",
issn = "0308-0110",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "10",

}

The majority of bold statements expressed during grand rounds lack scientific merit. / Linthorst, Gabor E.; Daniels, Johannes M. A.; van Westerloo, David J.

In: Medical Education, Vol. 41, No. 10, 2007, p. 965-967.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - The majority of bold statements expressed during grand rounds lack scientific merit

AU - Linthorst, Gabor E.

AU - Daniels, Johannes M. A.

AU - van Westerloo, David J.

PY - 2007

Y1 - 2007

N2 - CONTEXT: Frequently, during grand rounds and other medical conferences, bold statements are made regarding 'exotic medical facts'. Such exotic expert opinions are frequently voiced with great conviction and are usually subsequently assimilated by junior staff as medical fact. METHODS: The level of scientific evidence for each exotic expert opinion expressed during daily grand rounds over a 4-month period was evaluated. If, following a short discussion of the statement, any doubt as to the merits of the claim persisted, the person who made the statement was asked to perform a search in the medical literature on the subject. RESULTS: In total, 25 cases of exotic expert opinion were identified during the study period. Of these, 22 statements were made by senior staff and 3 by residents. Careful review of the literature showed only 8 of the statements were actually evidence-based. In 17 cases the available literature actually contradicted the statement (n = 13) or no literature on the subject could be located (n = 4). Although opinions were most often expressed by staff members, the reviews of their merits were more often performed by residents. CONCLUSIONS: The vast majority of exotic expert opinions expressed by senior staff members during grand rounds are not evidence-based. Thus, great care must be taken to ensure that exotic expert opinion is not accepted as factual without careful review. Furthermore, this study shows that although seniority is (as expected) associated with a higher incidence of voicing exotic expert opinion, it is negatively associated with reviewing the merits of such opinion. © 2007 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

AB - CONTEXT: Frequently, during grand rounds and other medical conferences, bold statements are made regarding 'exotic medical facts'. Such exotic expert opinions are frequently voiced with great conviction and are usually subsequently assimilated by junior staff as medical fact. METHODS: The level of scientific evidence for each exotic expert opinion expressed during daily grand rounds over a 4-month period was evaluated. If, following a short discussion of the statement, any doubt as to the merits of the claim persisted, the person who made the statement was asked to perform a search in the medical literature on the subject. RESULTS: In total, 25 cases of exotic expert opinion were identified during the study period. Of these, 22 statements were made by senior staff and 3 by residents. Careful review of the literature showed only 8 of the statements were actually evidence-based. In 17 cases the available literature actually contradicted the statement (n = 13) or no literature on the subject could be located (n = 4). Although opinions were most often expressed by staff members, the reviews of their merits were more often performed by residents. CONCLUSIONS: The vast majority of exotic expert opinions expressed by senior staff members during grand rounds are not evidence-based. Thus, great care must be taken to ensure that exotic expert opinion is not accepted as factual without careful review. Furthermore, this study shows that although seniority is (as expected) associated with a higher incidence of voicing exotic expert opinion, it is negatively associated with reviewing the merits of such opinion. © 2007 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

KW - Attitude of Health Personnel

KW - Clinical Competence/standards

KW - Communication

KW - Internship and Residency/standards

KW - Netherlands

KW - Teaching/methods

UR - https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=34848818530&origin=inward

UR - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17908113

U2 - 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2007.02838.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2007.02838.x

M3 - Article

VL - 41

SP - 965

EP - 967

JO - Medical Education

JF - Medical Education

SN - 0308-0110

IS - 10

ER -