NYTimes: Her Various Symptoms Seemed Unrelated. Then One Doctor Put It All Together.

Nonie Leonidas nonieleonidas68 at GMAIL.COM
Fri Feb 23 09:30:41 UTC 2018


Please suggest or correct any of these Commandments. I am thinking of
improving it.
Thanks, Leonardo Leonidas
(Author of Ten Commandments to Reduce Diagnostic Errors.)

*

Ten Commandments to Reduce Cognitive Errors


1 Thou shalt reflect on how you think and decide.

2 Thou shalt not rely on your memory when making critical decisions.

3 Thou shalt make your working environment information-friendly by using
the latest wireless technology such as the iPad, Kindle, Samsung Notes,
Nexus.

4 Thou shalt consider other possibilities even though you are sure of your
first diagnosis.

5 Thou shalt include Bayesian probability and the epidemiology of the
diseases in your differential diagnosis.

6 Thou shalt mentally rehearse common and serious conditions that you
expect to see in your specialty.

7 Thou shalt ask yourself if you are the right person to make the final
decision or a specialist after considering the patient’s values and wishes.

8 Thou shalt take time to decide and not be pressured by anyone.

9 Thou shalt create accountability procedures and follow up for decisions
made.

10 Thou shalt record in a relational data base software your patient’s
problems and decisions for review and improvement.


Copyright Leo Leonidas 2003


Leonardo L. Leonidas, MD

Assistant Clinical Professor in Pediatrics (retired 2008)

Distinguished Career Teaching Award, 2009

Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, USA


On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 11:06 PM, HM Epstein <hmepstein at gmail.com> wrote:

> Excellent question Megan! Few medical centers have diagnostic specialists.
> For example, Children’s Hospital of St. Louis used to have two dedicated
> pediatric specialists who would focus on one complex diagnostic case every
> week. They would dig through the hundreds of pages of test results, labs,
> radiology reports, scans, etc. and then examine the patient and try to
> identify what had been missed. They were very successful with the patients
> but lost their funding a few years ago. We need more dedicated Dr. Houses
> (or dedicated Diagnostic Centers) in every state without creating the
> iatrogenic mess House would spin off with each case. But we also need to
> simultaneously train the new generations of doctors in medical schools how
> to think critically and do a proper differential. Few are taught this in
> med schools.
> Best,
> Helene
>
>
> Website <http://hmepstein.com/> Twitter <https://twitter.com/hmepstein>
> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/helenekepstein/>
>> Facebook <https://www.facebook.com/HeleneEpsteinAuthor>
>
> On Feb 21, 2018, at 7:36 PM, Megan Golden <mgolden at MISSION-CURE.ORG>
> wrote:
>
> Some observations about the NYT article from a first-time poster: I am not
> a physician but rather the founder of a nonprofit called *Mission: Cure*
> dedicated to using innovative financing based on patient outcomes to cure
> disease. We are focusing initially on chronic pancreatitis (which my
> brother is suffering from), which is frequently undiagnosed or
> misdiagnosed. The diagnosis issues are exacerbated by the fact that most
> physicians are taught that it is a disease of alcoholics, which research
> has shown not to be true. I would love to get this group's input on
> pancreatitis diagnosis at some point, but for this post I wanted to put in
> my 2 cents on the Times article.
>
> First, I wonder whether diagnosis is a specialty that should be done by
> experts that specialize in problem-solving using the range of techniques
> discussed on this listserv. In the article, Dr. May really wanted to and
> tried to determine the diagnosis but it was a doctor who is really
> passionate about diagnosis who "solved" the case. While we ideally want all
> doctors to be good diagnosticians using effective methods, it seems like
> the obstacles to achieving that are huge (barring some big systemic
> changes).
>
> Second, it strikes me that the discussion of how well the doctor did seems
> to be independent of how the patient was feeling. This patient was
> seriously ill and in pain for several years. There was a diagnosis to
> explain her illness and (luckily) a therapy to treat it, she just needed
> someone who had the motivation and the skills to put the evidence together
> and do the problem solving. I am not blaming all of the doctors who saw her
> since it was a rare disease and, as people have commented, hard to
> diagnose. But wouldn't it be better to have a system where if a person is
> sick to the point of being unable to participate in normal life, and there
> is not a definitive diagnosis, a diagnostician is brought in right away
> (when she presents to her local doctors, not the teaching hospital) to
> figure it out? What would it take to incentivize that?
>
> Thanks for including me in this excellent discussion.
> Megan Golden
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 1:50 PM, Elias Peter <pheski69 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I don’t know that my perspective does more than offer a way to visualize
>> how context plays a role, in the primary care setting.   I found it useful,
>> though, when teaching. It provided a way to reassure learners that a key
>> lesson to learn was not that they needed to master ‘all of medicine’ but
>> that they needed to recognize those rare instances where one had to be
>> right, right now, and what to do in those rare instances. Beyond that,
>> accuracy counts more than speed.
>>
>> About incentives.  I would take issue with my own statement that the
>> consequences are small, unless qualified by saying the the external
>> consequences are small. For me, and for the clinician mentors and
>> colleagues I have learned from and admired, the incentive was always
>> internal and personal rather than external and structural. The best
>> clinicians I have known have been those who were driven to find the right
>> answer, not those driven to check the right boxes or avoid litigation. I
>> don’t know how to make that standard. It would seem that there are two
>> parts. First, the selection process. Second, a system that focuses on
>> internal rather than external rewards (reversing course in many ways) and
>> is based on transparency and valuing honest self-scrutiny, admitting
>> ignorance and error in order to learn from them. Culture, in other words.
>>
>> Peter
>>
>>
>> On 2018.02.21, at 12:07 PM, Bob Latino <blatino at reliability.com> wrote:
>>
>> Thank you (as always) for your experience and well-reasoned reply.
>>
>> Seems to me that you have outlined a draft priority schedule for the
>> diagnoses that actually result in the worst outcomes.  Is that a start to
>> trying to break 'diagnosis error' cause category down into its manageable
>> chunks and start to analyze what system's level factors contribute to such
>> decisions?
>>
>> If the perceived consequences to the clinician are small, what is the
>> incentive for t hem to take the time to try to be more accurate and timely
>> in our diagnoses?
>>
>> Thanks again Peter
>> Bob
>>
>> *Robert J. Latino, CEO*
>> Reliability Center, Inc.
>> 1.800.457.0645 <(800)%20457-0645>
>> blatino at reliability.com
>> www.reliability.com
>> <image001.jpg>
>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/958495?trk=tyah&trkInfo=clickedVertical%3Acompany%2CclickedEntityId%3A958495%2Cidx%3A1-1-1%2CtarId%3A1464096807851%2Ctas%3Areliability%20center%2C%20inc.>
>>
>> *From:* Elias Peter [mailto:pheski69 at GMAIL.COM <pheski69 at GMAIL.COM>]
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 21, 2018 1:32 PM
>> *To:* IMPROVEDX at LIST.IMPROVEDIAGNOSIS.ORG
>> *Subject:* Re: [IMPROVEDX] NYTimes: Her Various Symptoms Seemed
>> Unrelated. Then One Doctor Put It All Together.
>>
>> I understood the question to be, “What are the consequences TO THE DOCTOR
>> for not making an accurate diagnosis the first time?"
>>
>>
>>    - Having to admit “I don’t know” and run the risk of feeling
>>    competent or being considered incompetent but the patient.
>>    - In a training setting (medical student, resident, fellow) there is
>>    the risk of being criticized by supervisors.
>>    - In a clinical setting, there is the risk of being criticized or
>>    thought less of by colleagues, or harm to reputation.
>>    - There is the concern about legal risk if negative consequences
>>    result from the delay.
>>
>>
>> Forty years as a primary care clinician led me to see this issue in
>> somewhat separable clumps:
>>
>>
>>    - The infinitesimally small number of cases where there were dire
>>    medical consequences for not knowing what it is and what to do, right now,
>>    this instant, in real time. OB is the classic example, with things like
>>    unsuspected breech or shoulder dystocia during delivery, or an obtunded
>>    newborn.
>>    - The larger but still quite small number of cases where one is
>>    unlikely to get a second try but seconds and minutes do not count.
>>    - The big chunk where first-pass diagnosis makes you feel good but
>>    doesn’t change the outcome. (A case of cutaneous anthrax is one I remember.)
>>    - The very large chunk (I’d guesstimate 60% or more) where an
>>    accurate diagnosis cannot be made on the first pass without doing a large
>>    number of inappropriate tests - where time and the natural history are the
>>    best diagnostic tools. This applies to much of rheumatology, many
>>    non-specific but common symptoms: fatigue, pruritus, constipation, nausea,
>>    weight loss, insomnia, dizziness, various mood and behavior disorders, pain
>>    without findings on exam.
>>
>>
>> But, in response to the question posed by Bob Latino, I think the
>> consequences to the clinician are generally small. (This does not apply to
>> all areas of medicine, of course.)
>>
>> Peter
>>
>> On 2018.02.21, at 9:54 AM, Grubenhoff, Joe <Joe.Grubenhoff at CHILDRENSCOLOR
>> ADO.ORG> wrote:
>>
>> I think that is condition-specific. If it’s sepsis or impending cardiac
>> arrest from an OD, then the negative consequence is massive. If it’s
>> pediatric lupus a few weeks to months is probably not catastrophic for the
>> patient. The potential negative consequence to trying always be accurate on
>> the first patient encounter is over-testing, unnecessary testing and
>> astronomically skyrocketing cost.
>>
>> Case in point: Mother brings in her well-appearing toddler with fever for
>> 2-3 hours. No other symptoms. The possible causes are effectively (not
>> literally) infinite and I can’t test for all of them. I can order a CBC
>> which tells me nothing of the source or nothing at all if normal. I can
>> order blood cultures (knowing that the ratio of true infection to
>> contaminant is around 1:5 to 1:7). I could shoot a CXR to assess for occult
>> pneumonia, cath the child for urine culture, etc. etc. I can use a shotgun
>> approach and be no closer to a diagnosis after a 3 hour ER stay but have
>> exposed the patient to a number of harms (pain, radiation, dysuria,
>> possibly introducing an infection).
>>
>> We have to balance the negative consequences of missing a dx with the
>> negative consequences of searching for absolute certainty. And we have to
>> explain the ambiguity to our patients. Lastly we need to help them
>> understand that in many cases, time is a diagnostic test.
>>
>> *From:* Bob Latino [mailto:blatino at RELIABILITY.COM
>> <blatino at RELIABILITY.COM>]
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 21, 2018 9:43 AM
>> *To:* IMPROVEDX at LIST.IMPROVEDIAGNOSIS.ORG
>> *Subject:* Re: [IMPROVEDX] NYTimes: Her Various Symptoms Seemed
>> Unrelated. Then One Doctor Put It All Together.
>>
>> Outsider question that may be obvious to you experts:
>>
>>
>> What is the negative consequence to the doctor for not making an accurate
>> diagnosis the first time?
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>>
>> On Feb 21, 2018, at 11:40 AM, Elias Peter <pheski69 at GMAIL.COM> wrote:
>>
>> Some years ago, I wrote a short blog piece about my approach to teaching
>> FP residents to question both their diagnosis and their certainty:
>>
>> http://petereliasmd.com/node/10
>>
>>
>> Peter Elias, MD
>>
>>
>> On 2018.02.21, at 6:44 AM, Joe Graedon <jgraedon at GMAIL.COM> wrote:
>>
>> Bill,
>>
>> You are a very insightful mentor and teacher. The problem is that in our
>> time-challenged environment “discordant data” are often ignored or
>> overlooked. Please take time to read Larry Weed’s brilliant book, Medicine
>> in Denial. You will quickly appreciate that Art has brought Dr. Weed’s
>> vision to reality.
>>
>> On another note, we were thrilled to see that patient engagement is now a
>> priority for ImproveDX. When patients and family members are considered
>> equal players in the diagnostic process we could see real advances in what
>> has been a challenging dilemma.
>>
>> Joe Graedon
>>
>> The People’s Pharmacy
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>>
>> On Feb 19, 2018, at 12:14 PM, Follansbee, William <follansbeewp at UPMC.EDU>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Art,
>>
>> I agree with your thoughtful comments. I would also add, however, that
>> for a disease like cellulitis, which I agree is frequently over diagnosed
>> and treated unnecessarily, the answer is not going to be in decision
>> support tools. Clinicians are just not going to consult them for such a
>> common diagnosis. It is also to teach them how to be a little more
>> thoughtful and analytic in their bedside decision making.   We teach
>> trainees to use small groups of common sense but not uncommonly overlooked
>> questions at appropriate times in the diagnostic process in a systematic
>> fashion. In this context, one question we emphasize that they should ask
>> themselves when considering a diagnosis is, “is there any discordant data?”
>> Cellulitis is rarely bilateral yet many patients admitted and treated for
>> apparent cellulitis have red and swollen legs bilaterally, ie discordant
>> findings.  If their illness script for cellulitis includes bilateral
>> disease, then that is a knowledge problem that also has to be addressed.
>>
>> Best,
>> Bill
>>
>>
>> William P. Follansbee, M.D., FACC, FACP, FASNC
>> The Master Clinician Professor of Cardiovascular Medicine
>> Director, The UPMC Clinical Center for Medical Decision Making
>> Suite A429 UPMC Presbyterian
>> 200 Lothrop Street
>> <https://maps.google.com/?q=200+Lothrop+StreetPittsburgh,+PA+15213&entry=gmail&source=g>
>> Pittsburgh, PA 15213
>> <https://maps.google.com/?q=200+Lothrop+StreetPittsburgh,+PA+15213&entry=gmail&source=g>
>> Phone: 412-647-3437 <(412)%20647-3437>
>> Fax: 412-647-3873 <(412)%20647-3873>
>> Email: follansbeewp at upmc.edu
>>
>> <image001.gif>
>>
>> *This email may contain confidential information of the sending
>> organization. Any unauthorized or improper disclosure, copying,
>> distribution, or use of the contents of this email and attached document(s)
>> is prohibited. The information contained in this email and attached
>> document(s) is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the
>> recipient(s) named above. If you have received this communication in error,
>> please notify the sender immediately by email and delete the original email
>> and attached document(s).*
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Art Papier [mailto:apapier at VISUALDX.COM <apapier at VISUALDX.COM>]
>> *Sent:* Monday, February 19, 2018 11:17 AM
>> *To:* IMPROVEDX at LIST.IMPROVEDIAGNOSIS.ORG
>> *Subject:* Re: [IMPROVEDX] NYTimes: Her Various Symptoms Seemed
>> Unrelated. Then One Doctor Put It All Together.
>>
>> Likewise VisualDx had Schnitzler’s at the top of the differential, but as
>> much as I agree that all physicians need to understand and use point of
>> care diagnostic decision support, we should recognize that relatively rare
>> diseases like Schnitzler are uncommon and relatively easy for decision
>> support to “pick up”.   The real need is to handle the cases when
>> clinicians do not know they need help, but do need help.  How do you know
>> what you don’t know?  Uncommon diseases are uncommon, and therefore
>> variants of common are much more common that rare diseases.   Our real
>> challenge in decision support is to provide tools that also provide useful
>> and valuable content around the common, and more particularly with the
>> variants of the common so clinicians have decision support top of mind.
>> 80-20 rule:  If 80% of diagnoses are common, then it is reasonable to
>> assume that variants of the 80% dwarf the super rare diseases in number.
>> It is also safe to assume that clinicians who are in a constant rush, and
>> bogged down by mind-numbing EHR charting exercises, will question the
>> efficiency of using these tools.  We are focused on variation in disease
>> presentation in our work with the goal of expanding the use of decision
>> support beyond use for seemingly rare presentations.  We belive that the
>> memory based training and care delivery system creates self-fulfilling
>> prophecies where clinicians ask questions around the “classic presentation
>> disease” scripts they memorize, but do not know the questions to ask around
>> the related variants.  As an example,  over 100,000 people are admitted to
>> hospitals each year for cellulitis when they do not have cellulitits.  This
>> is a boring “story” for decision because cellulitis is common, but there is
>> so much harm happening just from error around this single diagnosis.  How
>> do we bend this curve and reduce unnecessary admissions while recognizing
>> all true positives?   By focusing on commn diseases and their variants we
>> can expand the use of decision support.
>>
>> Thanks to Lisa for another wonderfully written great case and prompting
>> discussion at SIDM !
>> Art
>>
>> Art Papier MD
>> CEO VisualDx
>> Associate Professor of Dermatology and Medical Informatics
>> University of Rochester
>> *From:* Edward Hoffer [mailto:ehoffer at GMAIL.COM <ehoffer at GMAIL.COM>]
>> *Sent:* Sunday, February 18, 2018 6:40 PM
>> *To:* IMPROVEDX at LIST.IMPROVEDIAGNOSIS.ORG
>> *Subject:* Re: [IMPROVEDX] NYTimes: Her Various Symptoms Seemed
>> Unrelated. Then One Doctor Put It All Together.
>>
>> This story makes a very good case for the use of computer-based
>> diagnostic decision support systems. I entered the findings into the one
>> with which I work, DXplain, and Schnitzler's came in ranked #1 I did not
>> try Isabel, but would not be surprised if it also had the correct diagnosis
>> near the top. Much easier than spending the reported "hours" in PubMed that
>> the hero expended to arrive at the correct diagnosis.
>> Ed
>> Edward P Hoffer MD, FACC, FACP
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 9:16 AM, Joe Graedon <jgraedon at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/14/magazine/her-various-symp
>> toms-seemed-unrelated-then-one-doctor-put-it-all-together.
>> html?smprod=nytcore-ipad&smid=nytcore-ipad-share
>>
>> Chills, sweats, hives, achey bones — the older woman was sick for years
>> before someone figured out the unusual disease that ailed her.
>>
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>>
>>
>> http://LIST.IMPROVEDIAGNOSIS.ORG/ <http://list.improvediagnosis.org/> (with
>> your password)
>>
>>
>> Moderator: David Meyers, Board Member, Society to Improve Diagnosis in
>> Medicine
>>
>> To unsubscribe from the IMPROVEDX list, click the following link:<br>
>> <a href="http://list.improvediagnosis.org/scripts/wa-IMPDIAG.ex
>> e?SUBED1=IMPROVEDX&A=1" target="_blank">http://list.im
>> provediagnosis.org/scripts/wa-IMPDIAG.exe?SUBED1=IMPROVEDX&A=1</a>
>> </p>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>>
>> To unsubscribe from IMPROVEDX: click the following link:
>> http://list.improvediagnosis.org/scripts/wa-IMPDIAG.exe?SUBE
>> D1=IMPROVEDX&A=1
>> or send email to: IMPROVEDX-SIGNOFF-REQUEST at LIST.IMPROVEDIAGNOSIS.ORG
>>
>>
>> Moderator:David Meyers, Board Member, Society for Improving Diagnosis in
>> Medicine
>>
>> To learn more about SIDM visit:
>> http://www.improvediagnosis.org/
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>>
>> To unsubscribe from IMPROVEDX: click the following link:
>> http://list.improvediagnosis.org/scripts/wa-IMPDIAG.exe?SUBE
>> D1=IMPROVEDX&A=1
>> or send email to: IMPROVEDX-SIGNOFF-REQUEST at LIST.IMPROVEDIAGNOSIS.ORG
>>
>>
>> Moderator:David Meyers, Board Member, Society for Improving Diagnosis in
>> Medicine
>>
>> To learn more about SIDM visit:
>> http://www.improvediagnosis.org/
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>>
>> To unsubscribe from IMPROVEDX: click the following link:
>> http://list.improvediagnosis.org/scripts/wa-IMPDIAG.exe?SUBE
>> D1=IMPROVEDX&A=1
>>
>> or send email to: IMPROVEDX-SIGNOFF-REQUEST at LIST.IMPROVEDIAGNOSIS.ORG
>>
>>
>>
>> Moderator:David Meyers, Board Member, Society for Improving Diagnosis in
>> Medicine
>>
>> To learn more about SIDM visit:
>> http://www.improvediagnosis.org/
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>>
>> To unsubscribe from IMPROVEDX: click the following link:
>> http://list.improvediagnosis.org/scripts/wa-IMPDIAG.exe?SUBE
>> D1=IMPROVEDX&A=1
>>
>> or send email to: IMPROVEDX-SIGNOFF-REQUEST at LIST.IMPROVEDIAGNOSIS.ORG
>>
>>
>>
>> Moderator:David Meyers, Board Member, Society for Improving Diagnosis in
>> Medicine
>>
>> To learn more about SIDM visit:
>> http://www.improvediagnosis.org/
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>>
>> To unsubscribe from IMPROVEDX: click the following link:
>> http://list.improvediagnosis.org/scripts/wa-IMPDIAG.exe?SUBE
>> D1=IMPROVEDX&A=1
>> or send email to: IMPROVEDX-SIGNOFF-REQUEST at LIST.IMPROVEDIAGNOSIS.ORG
>>
>>
>> Moderator:David Meyers, Board Member, Society for Improving Diagnosis in
>> Medicine
>>
>> To learn more about SIDM visit:
>> http://www.improvediagnosis.org/
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>>
>> To unsubscribe from IMPROVEDX: click the following link:
>> http://list.improvediagnosis.org/scripts/wa-IMPDIAG.exe?SUBE
>> D1=IMPROVEDX&A=1
>> or send email to: IMPROVEDX-SIGNOFF-REQUEST at LIST.IMPROVEDIAGNOSIS.ORG
>>
>>
>> Moderator:David Meyers, Board Member, Society for Improving Diagnosis in
>> Medicine
>>
>> To learn more about SIDM visit:
>> http://www.improvediagnosis.org/
>> ------------------------------
>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:  This e-mail, including any attachments, is for
>> the sole use of the intended recipient and may contain confidential and
>> privileged information.  If you are not an intended recipient, or the
>> person responsible for delivering this message to an intended recipient,
>> you are hereby notified that reading, copying, using or distributing this
>> message is prohibited. If you are not an intended recipient, please contact
>> the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message
>> from your computer system.
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>>
>> To unsubscribe from IMPROVEDX: click the following link:
>> http://list.improvediagnosis.org/scripts/wa-IMPDIAG.exe?SUBE
>> D1=IMPROVEDX&A=1
>>
>> or send email to: IMPROVEDX-SIGNOFF-REQUEST at LIST.IMPROVEDIAGNOSIS.ORG
>>
>>
>>
>> Moderator:David Meyers, Board Member, Society for Improving Diagnosis in
>> Medicine
>>
>> To learn more about SIDM visit:
>> http://www.improvediagnosis.org/
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>>
>> To unsubscribe from IMPROVEDX: click the following link:
>> http://list.improvediagnosis.org/scripts/wa-IMPDIAG.exe?SUBE
>> D1=IMPROVEDX&A=1
>> or send email to: IMPROVEDX-SIGNOFF-REQUEST at LIST.IMPROVEDIAGNOSIS.ORG
>>
>>
>> Moderator:David Meyers, Board Member, Society for Improving Diagnosis in
>> Medicine
>>
>> To learn more about SIDM visit:
>> http://www.improvediagnosis.org/
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>>
>> To unsubscribe from IMPROVEDX: click the following link:
>> http://list.improvediagnosis.org/scripts/wa-IMPDIAG.exe?SUBE
>> D1=IMPROVEDX&A=1 or send email to: IMPROVEDX-SIGNOFF-REQUEST at LIST
>> .IMPROVEDIAGNOSIS.ORG
>>
>> Moderator:David Meyers, Board Member, Society for Improving Diagnosis in
>> Medicine
>>
>> To learn more about SIDM visit:
>> http://www.improvediagnosis.org/
>
>
>
>
> --
> Megan Golden
> Co-Founder, *Mission: C**ure*
>
> *Partnering with impact investors to demonstrate a new model for curing
> disease*mgolden at mission-cure.org
> (401) 375-2873 (CURE)
> http://mission-cure.org
> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/megangolden>
> <https://twitter.com/mgoldennyc>
>
> ------------------------------
>
>
> To unsubscribe from IMPROVEDX: click the following link:
> http://list.improvediagnosis.org/scripts/wa-IMPDIAG.exe?
> SUBED1=IMPROVEDX&A=1
>
> or send email to: IMPROVEDX-SIGNOFF-REQUEST at LIST.IMPROVEDIAGNOSIS.ORG
>
>
>
> Moderator:David Meyers, Board Member, Society for Improving Diagnosis in
> Medicine
>
> To learn more about SIDM visit:
> http://www.improvediagnosis.org/
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
>
> To unsubscribe from IMPROVEDX: click the following link:
> http://list.improvediagnosis.org/scripts/wa-IMPDIAG.exe?
> SUBED1=IMPROVEDX&A=1 or send email to: IMPROVEDX-SIGNOFF-REQUEST@
> LIST.IMPROVEDIAGNOSIS.ORG
>
> Moderator:David Meyers, Board Member, Society for Improving Diagnosis in
> Medicine
>
> To learn more about SIDM visit:
> http://www.improvediagnosis.org/
>






Moderator: David Meyers, Board Member, Society to Improve Diagnosis in Medicine


HTML Version:
URL: <../attachments/20180223/a7318aad/attachment.html>


More information about the Test mailing list