Posted by DSCH on August 30, 2003, at 9:52:27
In reply to Re: A poll for everyone... out of curiosity. » Ame Sans Vie, posted by Larry Hoover on August 27, 2003, at 14:06:00
> Well if diagnosis could ever be accurate, it would save a lot of problems. When I go to a doctor, I go because of symptoms, not because I'm looking for a diagnosis. A diagnosis is a tool for doctors, and may not even be in the patient's best interests. The standard paradigm is:
> SX --> DX --> TX --> PX?
> What I was trying to represent is the following:
> 1. A patient presents with symptoms (SX).
> 2. A doctor selects the important ones (many may be irrelevant, at least to the doctor}, and comes to a diagnosis(DX).
> 3. The diagnosis (!) informs the treatment(TX). In other words, there's now a disconnect from the symptoms, but that wouldn't matter if the diagnosis is 100% accurate.
> 4. The prognosis (PX) is suggested by the TX, but we all know how much of a crapshoot that is.
> So, treating the symptoms is the only approach that is truly in the patient's best interests, IMHO.
At this point, my intellectual vanity ;-) would like to offer up an earlier post of mine for comments.
Does anyone have data on what percentage of patients see substantial improvement in the double blind trials relative to placebo for some of the standard bearer medications for depression and ADD?