Difference between revisions of "Are we sure to know everything?"

no edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
{{main menu}}
{{main menu}}
{{Versions
 
| en = Are we sure to know everything?
| it = Siamo sicuri di sapere tutto?
| fr = Sommes-nous sûrs de tout savoir?
| de = Wissen wir wirklich alles?
| es = ¿Estamos seguros de saberlo todo?
| pt = <!-- portoghese -->
| ru = <!-- russo -->
| pl = <!-- polacco -->
| fi = <!-- finlandese/suomi -->
| ca = <!-- catalano -->
| ja = <!-- giapponese -->
}}
[[File:Question 2.jpg|left|150x150px]]
[[File:Question 2.jpg|left|150x150px]]
We are approaching the conclusion of the first section of Masticationpedia which essentially had the task of representing the status quo of diagnostics in the field of Orofacial pain and Temporomandibular Disorders. We have also presented the first obstacles that arise in the face of a correct, detailed and rapid diagnosis but perhaps it escapes the researcher and clinician a little that there are also problems and limitations outside the clinical context for example when thinking about the order effect of the information presented to the doctor to make the diagnosis. Once we know this cognitive phenomenon, how can we represent it statistically? Unfortunately, classical statistics with the famous and inflated Bayes Theorem is not suitable because the variables are not compatible. For this reason, before moving on to the presentation of the last two patients we highlighted some underlying anomalies.
We are approaching the conclusion of the first section of Masticationpedia which essentially had the task of representing the status quo of diagnostics in the field of Orofacial pain and Temporomandibular Disorders. We have also presented the first obstacles that arise in the face of a correct, detailed and rapid diagnosis but perhaps it escapes the researcher and clinician a little that there are also problems and limitations outside the clinical context for example when thinking about the order effect of the information presented to the doctor to make the diagnosis. Once we know this cognitive phenomenon, how can we represent it statistically? Unfortunately, classical statistics with the famous and inflated Bayes Theorem is not suitable because the variables are not compatible. For this reason, before moving on to the presentation of the last two patients we highlighted some underlying anomalies.
Editor, Editors, USER, admin, Bureaucrats, Check users, dev, editor, founder, Interface administrators, oversight, Suppressors, Administrators, translator
10,784

edits