Reader response: Value of witness observations in the differential diagnosis of transient loss of consciousness
Nitin K.Sethi, Associate Professor of Neurology, New York-Presbyterian Hospital/Weill Cornell Medical Center (New York, NY)
Submitted February 21, 2019
I read with interest the study by Chen et al. that explored the value of witness observations in the differential diagnosis of transient loss of consciousness.1 The study results support the importance of patient and eyewitness history serving as the basis for ordering relevant diagnostic tests leading to a timely and accurate diagnosis. The authors’ Paroxysmal Event Observer questionnaire uses closed-ended questions that can be answered by a simple "yes" or "no." Including some open-ended questions, such as "can you please describe in your own words what you witnessed," require more thought on the part of the interviewee and shall help avoid falling into the trap of asking leading questions.
Reference
Chen M, Jamnadas-Khoda J, Broadhurst M, et al. Value of witness observations in the differential diagnosis of transient loss of consciousness. Neurology 2019;92:1–10.
I read with interest the study by Chen et al. that explored the value of witness observations in the differential diagnosis of transient loss of consciousness.1 The study results support the importance of patient and eyewitness history serving as the basis for ordering relevant diagnostic tests leading to a timely and accurate diagnosis. The authors’ Paroxysmal Event Observer questionnaire uses closed-ended questions that can be answered by a simple "yes" or "no." Including some open-ended questions, such as "can you please describe in your own words what you witnessed," require more thought on the part of the interviewee and shall help avoid falling into the trap of asking leading questions.
Reference
Footnote
For disclosures, please contact the editorial office at journal@neurology.org.