Expert-novice differences in the use of history and visual information from patients

The study examines the ability of medical students and general internists to extract diagnostic information from visual and verbal descriptions. Twenty cases, consisting of a head - and shoulders photograph and a very brief written history were presented to 19 medical students and 12 internists. After the history only, diagnostic accuracy was 10% and 19%; after the history and photo, it was 40% and 60%, and after a verbal interpretation of the photograph was provided, accuracy increased to 60% and 79%. Both students and experts make extensive use of visual information, however both benefit from interpretation of diagnostic signs, even with apparently "classical" presentations.