Clinical Reasoning, Pathophysiology, and Artificial Intelligence in Critical Care: A Conceptual Framework for Integrating Decision-Making
- 1Department of Internal Medicine, Federal University of Paraná (UFPR), Curitiba 80060-150, Paraná, Brazil
- 2Post-Graduate Program in Internal Medicine and Health Sciences (PPGMICS), Federal University of Paraná (UFPR), Curitiba 80060-150, Paraná, Brazil
- 3CEPETI—Center for Studies and Research in Intensive Care, Curitiba 82530-200, Paraná, Brazil
Abstract
Medical practice is an interpretive, decision-making activity conducted under uncertainty, and care quality depends on clinicians’ ability to organize knowledge into hypotheses, understand mechanisms, estimate probabilities, and revise decisions as the clinical course evolves. In critical care, where physiology is unstable and trajectories are nonlinear, these demands are magnified. We propose a conceptual framework integrating three complementary dimensions: clinical reasoning, which provides the cognitive architecture of decision-making; pathophysiology, which supplies the causal structure to interpret biological phenomena; and artificial intelligence, which, when well designed and critically used, can organize data, generate hypotheses, and reduce cognitive load. Tracing the evolution of clinical reasoning from the anatomoclinical model to hypothetico-deductive, probabilistic, cognitive, and sociotechnical models, we examine how diagnostic and therapeutic errors arise from interacting cognitive biases, system factors, and case characteristics, and how better problem representation, differential diagnosis, and team culture may mitigate them. We also frame Bayesian reasoning and decision thresholds as the probabilistic grammar of bedside decisions, analyze the risks of artificial intelligence, including automation bias, opacity, and limited metacognition, and propose principles for its safe use. Rather than replacing physicians, artificial intelligence should strengthen clinical reasoning and reinforce calibrated, accountable bedside judgment. These principles are intended as a framework for future research and require empirical validation before clinical translation.
Related
- Toward Precision Colorectal Cancer Screening: Integrating Clinical Risk Stratification, Molecular Biomarkers, and Artificial Intelligence
- Toward an epistemic grounding of clinical reasoning: artificial intelligence and psychological diagnosis.
- On the variability of generative artificial intelligence methods in conceptual modeling: an experimental evaluation on combining causal maps
- Hepatobiliary cancers digital twins: Integrating artificial intelligence-driven multi-omics with organoid dynamics
- Theranostic Imaging Agents: Integrating Molecular Diagnostics, Precision Therapeutics, and Artificial Intelligence
BibTeX
@article{reaneto2026clinical,
title = {{Clinical Reasoning, Pathophysiology, and Artificial Intelligence in Critical Care: A Conceptual Framework for Integrating Decision-Making}},
author = {Álvaro Réa-Neto and Jeane Cristina Fonseca Vieira},
journal = {Journal of Clinical Medicine},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.3390/jcm15207987},
url = {https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/15/20/7987},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Clinical Reasoning, Pathophysiology, and Artificial Intelligence in Critical Care: A Conceptual Framework for Integrating Decision-Making
AU - Álvaro Réa-Neto
AU - Jeane Cristina Fonseca Vieira
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/01
JO - Journal of Clinical Medicine
DO - 10.3390/jcm15207987
UR - https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/15/20/7987
AB - Medical practice is an interpretive, decision-making activity conducted under uncertainty, and care quality depends on clinicians’ ability to organize knowledge into hypotheses, understand mechanisms, estimate probabilities, and revise decisions as the clinical course evolves. In critical care, where physiology is unstable and trajectories are nonlinear, these demands are magnified. We propose a conceptual framework integrating three complementary dimensions: clinical reasoning, which provides the cognitive architecture of decision-making; pathophysiology, which supplies the causal structure to interpret biological phenomena; and artificial intelligence, which, when well designed and critically used, can organize data, generate hypotheses, and reduce cognitive load. Tracing the evolution of clinical reasoning from the anatomoclinical model to hypothetico-deductive, probabilistic, cognitive, and sociotechnical models, we examine how diagnostic and therapeutic errors arise from interacting cognitive biases, system factors, and case characteristics, and how better problem representation, differential diagnosis, and team culture may mitigate them. We also frame Bayesian reasoning and decision thresholds as the probabilistic grammar of bedside decisions, analyze the risks of artificial intelligence, including automation bias, opacity, and limited metacognition, and propose principles for its safe use. Rather than replacing physicians, artificial intelligence should strengthen clinical reasoning and reinforce calibrated, accountable bedside judgment. These principles are intended as a framework for future research and require empirical validation before clinical translation.
SN - 2077-0383
ER -