Abstract
AimsThis reel analysis identifies quotes and actions of fictional characters from TV shows, namely: Hercules Poirot, Sherlock Holmes and House who can demonstrate learning points for clinical students to use within real psychiatric practice, using scientific theories such as the Hypothetico-deductive model, Empirical falsification and Occam's razor. This analysis explores what an ideal psychiatric interview consists of and what can be learnt from these characters and implemented within medical education.MethodEach show was watched by one researcher over the period of March to August 2020. The researcher noted insightful quotes which were relevant to one of the three philosophical theories. Quotes were included if they demonstrated deduction skills, revealed a character's ethos and supported the Calgary-Cambridge model of interviewing such as building rapport. 32 quotations were collected in total and narrowed to 6 quotations. These were then analysed, learning points were made and linked to the Calgary Cambridge model.ResultDr House demonstrates objectivity when taking a patient's history. He utilises empirical falsification when diagnosing to avoid missing a differential diagnosis. Detective Poirot displays how empathic listening allows disclosure of details in the history, which would have otherwise been omitted. Additionally, he illustrates the importance of collateral interviewing which allows one to identify misinterpretations and inconsistencies. Sherlock teaches us the importance of perception regarding mismatching information which can help to gather new facts. All three characters interview beginning with open questions to more closed questions, supplementing with deductive reasoning in order to solve cases. Objectivity, empirical falsification, empathetic listening and deductive reasoning are the key skills displayed by these characters, that medical students can most use in their own practices.ConclusionThe perfect interview discovers new information through synchronised collaboration, whilst adhering to the Hypothetico-deductive model of thought. A combination of the Calgary-Cambridge model of interviewing and skillset of the TV characters should be considered for implementation in some aspects of psychiatric interviewing. Medical education can utilise these TV shows to teach students how to conduct history-taking.
Highlights
Patients with neurodevelopmental disorders had higher rates of diabetes (6.1% vs 2.4%), hypertension (6.1% vs 2.4%), hyperlipidaemia (7.1% vs 2.4%) and cardiovascular conditions (2.9% vs 0%) than those without a neurodevelopmental disorder
In terms of other medical comorbidities, patients with neurodevelopmental disorders had higher rates of thyroid abnormalities (4.7% vs 2.4%), respiratory problems (7.6% vs 2.4%), musculoskeletal conditions (5.8% vs 0%), eye issues (5% vs 2.4%) and hearing problems (2.9% vs 0%) but similar rates of dermatological conditions (10.1% vs 9.8%) and gastrointestinal conditions (4.7% vs 4.9%) compared to those with no neurodevelopmental disorders
This reel analysis identifies quotes and actions of fictional characters from TV shows, namely: Hercules Poirot, Sherlock Holmes and House who can demonstrate learning points for clinical students to use within real psychiatric practice, using scientific theories such as the Hypothetico-deductive model, Empirical falsification and Occam’s razor
Summary
Patients with neurodevelopmental disorders had higher rates of epilepsy (12.2% vs 4.9%), cerebral palsy (3.2% vs 0%) but lower rates of having other neurological conditions (1.4% vs 7.3%) compared to those with no neurodevelopmental disorders. Patients with neurodevelopmental disorders had higher rates of diabetes (6.1% vs 2.4%), hypertension (6.1% vs 2.4%), hyperlipidaemia (7.1% vs 2.4%) and cardiovascular conditions (2.9% vs 0%) than those without a neurodevelopmental disorder. In terms of other medical comorbidities, patients with neurodevelopmental disorders had higher rates of thyroid abnormalities (4.7% vs 2.4%), respiratory problems (7.6% vs 2.4%), musculoskeletal conditions (5.8% vs 0%), eye issues (5% vs 2.4%) and hearing problems (2.9% vs 0%) but similar rates of dermatological conditions (10.1% vs 9.8%) and gastrointestinal conditions (4.7% vs 4.9%) compared to those with no neurodevelopmental disorders.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
