Diagnostic Parsimony

Ockham Meets Bayes

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5195/pom.2022.123

Keywords:

Diagnosis, Parsimony, Bayes, Ockham's Razor, Probability

Abstract

Ockham’s razor is the idea that simpler hypotheses are to be preferred over more complex ones. In the context of medical diagnosis, this is taken to mean that when a patient has multiple symptoms, a single diagnosis should be sought that accounts for all the clinical features, rather than attributing a different diagnosis to each. This paper examines whether diagnostic parsimony can be justified by reference to probability theory. I argue that while attempts to offer universal justifications of diagnostic parsimony fail, a more constrained use of this diagnostic principle can be supported.

References

Djulbegovic, Benjamin, Jef van den Ende, Robert M. Hamm, Thomas Mayrhofer, Iztok Hozo, and Stephen G. Pauker. 2015. “When Is Rational to Order a Diagnostic Test, or Prescribe Treatment: The Threshold Model as an Explanation of Practice Variation.” European Journal of Clinical Investigation 45, no. 5: 485–493. https://doi.org/10.1111/eci.12421.

Fraser, Hamish, Enrico Coiera, and David Wong. 2018. “Safety of Patient-Facing Digital Symptom Checkers.” The Lancet 392, no. 10161: 2263–2264. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(18)32819-8.

Freixa, Marta, André F. Simões, Joana Barbosa Rodrigues, Sara Úria, and Glória Nunes da Silva. 2019. “Occam’s Razor versus Hickam’s Dictum: Two Very Rare Tumours in One Single Patient.” Oxford Medical Case Reports 2019, no. 5: 195–198. https://doi.org/10.1093/omcr/omz029.

Goodman, Nelson. 1958. “The Test of Simplicity.” Science 128, no. 3331: 1064–1069. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.128.3331.1064.

Hilliard, Anthony A., Steven E. Weinberger, Lawrence M. Tierney, David E. Midthun, and Sanjay Saint. 2004. “Occam’s Razor versus Saint’s Triad.” New England Journal of Medicine 350, no. 6: 599–603. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmcps031794.

Jefferys, William H. and James O. Berger. 1992. “Ockham’s Razor and Bayesian Analysis.” American Scientist 80, no. 1: 64–72. https://www.jstor.org/stable/29774559.

Jolobe, Oscar. 2016. “Caveats to the Application of Diagnostic Parsimony.” QJM 109, no. 2: 143. https://doi.org/10.1093/qjmed/hcv157.

Kemeny, John G. 1953. “The Use of Simplicity in Induction.” Philosophical Review 62, no. 3: 391–408. https://doi.org/10.2307/2182878.

MacKay, David. 2003. Information Theory, Inference and Learning Algorithms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Mayo, Deborah G. 1996. Error and the Growth of Experimental Knowledge. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Pauker, Stephen G. and Jerome P. Kassirer. 1975. “Therapeutic Decision Making: A Cost Benefit Analysis.” New England Journal of Medicine 293, no. 5: 229–234. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm197507312930505.

———. 1980. “The Threshold Approach to Clinical Decision Making.” New England Journal of Medicine 302, no. 20: 1109–1117. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM198005153022003.

Plutynski, Anya. 2005. “Parsimony and the Fisher-Wright Debate.” Biology and Philosophy 20, no. 4: 697–713. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10539-004-7044-0.

Popper, Karl R. 1959. The Logic of Scientific Discovery. London: Hutchinson.

Richardson, W. Scott. 2007. “We Should Overcome the Barriers to Evidence-Based Clinical Diagnosis.” Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 60, no. 3: 217–227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.06.002.

Savage, Leonard J. 1954. The Foundations of Statistics. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Schattner, Ami. 2015. “Teaching Clinical Medicine: The Key Principals.” QJM 108, no. 6: 435–442. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/qjmed/hcv022.

———. 2016. “Caveats to the Application of Diagnostic Parsimony—Reply.” QJM 109, no. 2: 144. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/qjmed/hcv161.

Sober, Elliott. 1988. Reconstructing the Past: Parsimony, Evolution and Inference. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

———. 1990. “Explanation in Biology: Let’s Razor Ockham’s Razor.” Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 27: 73–93. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1358246100005051.

———. 2015. Ockham’s Razors: A User’s Manual. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Sox, Harold C., Michael C. Higgins, and Douglas K. Owens. 2013. Medical Decision Making. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.

Downloads

Published

2022-12-01

How to Cite

Autzen, B. (2022). Diagnostic Parsimony: Ockham Meets Bayes. Philosophy of Medicine, 3(1). https://doi.org/10.5195/pom.2022.123

Issue

Vol. 3 No. 1 (2022)

Section

Analysis

License

Copyright (c) 2022 Bengt Autzen

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. The Author retains copyright in the Work, where the term “Work” shall include all digital objects that may result in subsequent electronic publication or distribution.
  2. Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.
  3. The Author shall grant to the Publisher and its agents the nonexclusive perpetual right and license to publish, archive, and make accessible the Work in whole or in part in all forms of media now or hereafter known under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License or its equivalent, which, for the avoidance of doubt, allows others to copy, distribute, and transmit the Work under the following conditions:
    1. Attribution—other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site;
    with the understanding that the above condition can be waived with permission from the Author and that where the Work or any of its elements is in the public domain under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by the license.
  4. The Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the Work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as long as there is provided in the document an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  5. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a prepublication manuscript (but not the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work. Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.
  6. Upon Publisher’s request, the Author agrees to furnish promptly to Publisher, at the Author’s own expense, written evidence of the permissions, licenses, and consents for use of third-party material included within the Work, except as determined by Publisher to be covered by the principles of Fair Use.
  7. The Author represents and warrants that:
    1. the Work is the Author’s original work;
    2. the Author has not transferred, and will not transfer, exclusive rights in the Work to any third party;
    3. the Work is not pending review or under consideration by another publisher;
    4. the Work has not previously been published;
    5. the Work contains no misrepresentation or infringement of the Work or property of other authors or third parties; and
    6. the Work contains no libel, invasion of privacy, or other unlawful matter.
  8. The Author agrees to indemnify and hold Publisher harmless from Author’s breach of the representations and warranties contained in Paragraph 6 above, as well as any claim or proceeding relating to Publisher’s use and publication of any content contained in the Work, including third-party content.
  9. The Author agrees to digitally sign the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work.

Funding data