Skip to main content

Coping with Complexity and Uncertainty: Insights from Studying Epidemiology in Family Medicine

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
  • 1173 Accesses

Abstract

Family medicine’s epidemiology is complex, it shows a power-law or Pareto distribution of consultation outcomes. Eighty percent of consultations end with an “uncertain diagnoses” [more accurately these consultations end with descriptive terms of symptom, group of symptoms or disease picture (or syndromes)] and only 20 % have a well-defined diagnosis. Robert N. Braun developed a pragmatic approach—a hierarchy of diagnostic certainty, and diagnostic protocols—to help general practitioners/family physicians to cope with the discipline’s complexities in everyday practice, and elaborated critically on the limitations of heuristics and Bayesian approaches as tools for clinical decision-making.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Die Diagnose ist also ein Ausdruck für die Summe der Erkenntnis, die den Arzt zu seinem Handeln und Verhalten veranlasst. …Diagnostiziert wird nicht ein Krankheitsbegriff, sondern der Zustand eines einzelnen. [The diagnosis is an expression of the sum of insights that cause the physician to act and respond. …We do not diagnose the label for the person’s illness experience, i.e. the diagnosis, but rather the state of experience of that person.]

  2. 2.

    \(P(A\vert B) = \frac{P(B\vert A)P(A)} {P(B)}\); where A and B are events. P(A) and P(B) are the probabilities of A and B independent of each other. P(A | B), a conditional probability, is the probability of A given that B is true. P(B | A) is the probability of B given that A is true.

  3. 3.

    SEN Sensibility; PRE Prevalence; SPE Specificity.

  4. 4.

    Also see NN Taleb, Fooled by Randomness (2004, pp. 269–270). Taleb reiterated Meehl’s critique of the “clinical expert” in the 1950s.

  5. 5.

    Note: The Bayesian approach is not a tool designed for problems involving high degrees of uncertainty, like undifferentiated presentations in primary care. Bayes requires well-defined data, usually gained from specific sources (e.g. cardiac catheter examination) whose sensitivities and specificities are well known.

References

  1. Braun RN. Die gezielte Diagnostik in der Praxis. Stuttgart: Schattauer Verlag; 1957.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Braun RN. Lehrbuch der ärztlichen Allgemeinpraxis. München, Berlin, Wien: Urban & Schwarzenberg; 1970.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Cochrane AL, Blythe M. One man’s medicine. 2nd ed. Cardiff: Cardiff University Press; 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Marinker M. Sirens, stray dogs an the narrative of Hilda Thompson. In: Greenhalgh T, Hurwitz B, editors. Narrative based medicine. London: BMJ Books; 1998. p. 103–9.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Pareto W. In: Montesano A, Zanni A, Bruni L, Chipman JS, Mclure M, editors. Manual of political economy. A critical and variorum edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Sturmberg JP, Martin CM. Handbook of systems and complexity in health. New York, NY: Springer; 2013.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  7. Göpel H. Beratungsursachen in einer Allgemeinpraxis. Praktischer Arzt. 1975;Heft 12:3508–26.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Schach E, Schwartz FW, et al. Die EVaS-Studie. Köln: Deutscher rzte Verlag; 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Kühlein Th, Laux G, Gutscher A, Szecsenyi J. Kontinuierliche Morbiditätsregistrierung in der Hausarztpraxis. Vom Beratungsanlass zum Beratungsergebnis - CONTENT. München: Urban & Vogel; 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  10. White KL, Williams TF, Greenberg BG. The ecology of medical care. N Engl J Med. 1961;265(18):885–92.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Green LA, Fryer GE, Yawn B, Lanier D, Dovey S. The ecology of medical care revisited. N Engl J Med. 2001;344(26):2021–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Okkes IM, Polderman GO, Fryer GE, Yamada T, Bujak M, Oskam S K, Green LA, Lamberts H. The role of family practice in different health caresystems. A comparison of reasons for encounter, diagnoses, and interventions in primary care populations in the Netherlands, Japan, Poland, and the United States. J Fam Pract. 2002;51:72–91.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Horder J, Horder E. Illness in general practice. Practitioner 1954;173(1034):177–87.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. McGregor RM. The review of a family practice. Health Bull. 1953;11(1):14.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Logan WPD. Studies on medical population subjects No.7 and No.9. General Practitioners Records. London: HSMO; 1953.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Braun RN. Über fundamental wichtige, bisher unbekannte, die allgemeine Morbidität betreffende Gesetzmäßigkeiten. Vortrag Ges.Ärzte, Wien, 11.3.1955. Klinische Wochenschrift. 1955;12:216

    Google Scholar 

  17. West BJ. Mathematical principles: tale of tails. In: Sturmberg JP, Martin CM, editors. Handbook of systems and complexity in health. New York, NY: Springer; 2013. p. 63–80.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  18. Luhmann N. Social systems. Stanford: Stanford University Press; 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Lexis W. Theorie der Massenerscheinungen. Freiburg i.B.: Fr. Wagnersche Buchhandlung; 1877.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Braun RN, Fink W, Kamenski G. Angewandte Medizin und wissenschaftliche Grundlagen. Wien: Facultas; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Keynes JM. A treatise on probability; 1921 (Repr. Rough Draft Breinigsville. PA 2010).

    Google Scholar 

  22. Skidelsky R. Keynes: the return of the master. London, New York: Allen Lane an Imprint of Penguin Books; 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Mandelbrot B, Hudson RL. The (mis)behaviour of the markets. A fractal view of risk, ruin and reward. London: Profile Books; 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Braun RN. Letter to Dr. med.Heinz Brandt, Schildau 30.08.88. Titel L. s. (Fotokopie). 1 f, 2 pp. 8. 4. 1988, s. l.; an Heinz Brandt; H 16/94. Verknüpfung Zettel, 1.Signatur 1282/15-7 Han Autogr. Austrian National Library (ÖNB), Vienna (unpublished)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Braun RN. Heilung für die Heilkunde. Autobiography. Sign.: Cod. Ser. n. 38768 Samml.: Han Wien, ÖNB (1991-1992) (unveröffentlicht). Signatur Cod. Ser. n. — Samml.: Han 1.Person Braun, Robert N., 1914–2007 [Verfasser] Titel Heilung für die Heilkunde Zusatz z. Titel Die Geschichte einer Entdeckung Ort lt. Unterlage o.O. Datum normiert 1991-1992 Art, Umfang, Anzahl Manuskript, 2 Mappen, I, 380 Bl. Austrian National Library (ÖNB), Vienna. Unpublished Manuscript; 1992/2012

    Google Scholar 

  26. Aitken AM, Braun RN, Fraillon JMG. Understanding general practice. Melbourne - Toorak: the Victorian academy for general practice; 1982 (without page numbers, only chapters numbered).

    Google Scholar 

  27. Koch R. Die ärztliche diagnose. 2nd ed. Wiesbaden: Verlag von J.F.Bergmann; 1920.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Braun RN, Fink W, Kamenski G. Lehrbuch der Allgemeinmedizin. Horn/NÖ, Wien: Verlag Berger; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Braun RN, Mader FH. Programmierte Diagnostik in der Allgemeinmedizin. 5th ed. Heidelberg, New York: Springer; 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Reichenfeld HF. Line and graph case records. J Coll Gen Pract. 1965;10(1):90–2.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Rosowsky O, Andral J, Cittee J, Brunel L, De Pouvouville G. Observation de la pathologie on medecin generale. La CASUGRAPHIE. Le concept de cas selon RN Braun dans la gestion du risque en situation diagnostique ouverte. Adaptation a la CIM 10. Saint Maurice: Ed CRI; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Reichenfeld HF. Recent developments in Germany and Austria. J Coll Gen Pract. 1965;10(1):107–8.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Fink W, Lipatov V, Konitzer M. Diagnoses by general practitioners: accuracy and reliability. Int J Forecasting 2009;25(4):784–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Tachimori Y, Tahara T. Clinical diagnoses following Zipfs law. Fractals. 2002;10(3):341–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Tachimori Y, Iwanagab H, Tahara T. The networks from medical knowledge and clinical practice have small-world, scale-free, and hierarchical features. Physica A. 2013;392(23):6084–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Zipf GK. Human behaviour and the principle of least effort. An introduction to human ecology. Cambridge: Addison-Wesley Press, Inc.; 1949 (Repr. Martino Publishing Mansfield CT 2012).

    Google Scholar 

  37. Umstätter W. Das “Principle of Least Effort” in der Wissenschaft; 2003. www.ib.hu-berlin.de/backsimwumsta/infopub/lectures/leasteffort03a.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Vogt R. Der Beratungsanlass in der allgemeinmedizinischen Konsultationssprechstunde - SESAM. Dissertation Medical Faculty Leipzig University; 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Szecsenyi J, Engelhardt N, Wessel M. Eine Methode zur Bestimmung des Denominators in Allgemeinpraxen - Ergebnisse einer Pilotstudie. Gesundheitswesen. 1993;55(Sonderheft):32–6.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Taleb NN. The black swan. The impact of the highly improbable. London: Penguin; 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Cooper G. The origin of financial crisis. Central banks, credit bubbles and the efficient market fallacy. New York: Vintage Books; 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Praetorius F. Bayes-Stadt: Zur Objektivität von Indikationen. DÄB 23 A. 1992;(89)23: 2113–20.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Meehl PE. Clinical versus statistical prediction. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota; 1954.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Donner-Banzhoff N, Haasenritter J, Bösner S, Viniol A, Becker A. Unsicherheit in der Allgemeinmedizin. A Mathematical Theory of Primary Care. Zeitschrift für Allgemeinmedizin. 2012;88(11):446–51.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Schneider A, Dinant GJ, Szecsenyi J. Zur Notwendigkeit einer abgestuften Diagnostik in der Allgemeinmedizin als Konsequenz des Bayes’schen Theorems. Zeitschrift für Ärztliche Fortbildung und Qualitt im Gesundheitswesen. 2006;100(2):121–7.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Fink W, Kamenski G, Kleinbichler D. Braun Kasugraphie.(K)ein Fall wie der andere. Benennung und Klassifikation der regelmäßig häufigen Gesundheitsstörungen in der primärärztlichen Versorgung. 3rd ed. Horn/NÖ: Verlag Berger; 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Osgood CE. Meaningful similarity and interference in learning. J Exp Psychol. 1946;36(Aug): 277–301.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Spengler O. Untergang des Abendlandes. Umrisse einer Morphologie der Weltgeschichte. Bd 1. München: C.H. Becksche Verlagsbuchhandlung; 1924.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Hofstadter D, Sander E. Surfaces and essences. Analogy as the fuel and fire of thinking. New York: Basic Books; 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Rosch E. Principles of categorization. In: Collins A, Smith EE, editors. Readings in cognitive science: A perspective from psychology and artificial intelligence. San Mateo: Morgan Kaufmann; 1988. p. 312–22.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  51. Sadegh-Zadeh K. Handbook of analytic philosophy of medicine. New York: Springer; 2012.

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Thanks to Frank H. Mader for discussing a faint idea of this manuscript in 2012.

Thanks to Klaus D. Kossow for providing the Praetorius reference [42].

Thanks to Joachim P. Sturmberg for thoroughly editing the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Martin Konitzer .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Konitzer, M., Fink, W., Lipatov, V., Kamenski, G., Knigge, T. (2016). Coping with Complexity and Uncertainty: Insights from Studying Epidemiology in Family Medicine. In: Sturmberg, J. (eds) The Value of Systems and Complexity Sciences for Healthcare. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-26221-5_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-26221-5_5

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-26219-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-26221-5

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics