Obstetrics & Gynecology Track the topics, authors and articles important to you
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Obstetrics & Gynecology 2003;102:356-362
© 2003 by The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Meadow, W. L.
Right arrow Articles by Sunstein, C. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Meadow, W. L.
Right arrow Articles by Sunstein, C. R.

CURRENT COMMENTARY

Statistics, Not Memories: What Was the Standard of Care for Administering Antenatal Steroids to Women in Preterm Labor Between 1985 and 2000?

William L. Meadow, MD, PhD, Anthony Bell, MD and Cass R. Sunstein, JD

Department of Pediatrics and Law School, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois

Address reprint requests to: William L. Meadow, MD, PhD, Department of Pediatrics, MC 6060, University of Chicago Children’s Hospital, 5825 South Maryland Avenue, Chicago, IL 60637; E-mail: wlm1{at}midway.uchicago.edu.

We determined the frequency of antenatal corticosteroid use for mothers with threatened premature delivery in 1985, 1990, 1995, and 2000. We next compared published data to the surveyed recollections of 302 obstetricians who were practicing during these years. Two points emerged. First, published reports reveal that the use of antenatal corticosteroids increased steadily, from 8% in 1985 to 20% in 1990, 52% in 1995, and 75% in 2000 (P < .001). Second, "expert" opinions derived from the recollections of practicing obstetricians consistently overestimated the actual use of antenatal corticosteroids during the year in question—31% versus 8% for 1985, 56% versus 20% for 1990, 78% versus 52% for 1995, and 92% versus 72% for 2000 (all Ps < .001). The use of antenatal corticosteroids by obstetricians in the past 15 years reveals a phenomenon that is widely recognized elsewhere—retrospective memories are often wrong, and when they are wrong they are not randomly wrong. Rather, recollections are systematically skewed toward an outcome that, in hindsight, is considered desirable (the "Monday morning quarterback" phenomenon). We offer a simple proposal. In determining the "standard of medical care," the legal system should rely on statistical data about doctors’ performance rather than the recollections of experts about doctors’ performance. The fallible memories of isolated experts are a crude second-best, far inferior to the data that they approximate. Widespread adoption of this view by professional physician organizations would dramatically increase the rationality of expert testimony in medical malpractice tort law.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Canadian J. AnesthesiaHome page
E. Crosby
Innovation in medical practice: from new idea to standard of care/L'innovation dans la pratique medicale ou comment une idee nouvelle devient une norme de soins
Can J Anesth, June 1, 2008; 55(6): 328 - 336.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Canadian J. AnesthesiaHome page
E. Crosby
Medical malpractice and anesthesiology: literature review and role of the expert witness: [Fautes medicales et anesthesiologie : revue de la litterature et role du temoin expert]
Can J Anesth, March 1, 2007; 54(3): 227 - 241.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2003 by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.