William Aird: Thinking Before Searching in Clinical Decision Making
William Aird, Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School, shared a post on LinkedIn:
“Modern clinicians have unprecedented access to evidence.
With a few keystrokes we can pull up continuously updated summaries from resources like UpToDate, DynaMed, or newer AI-assisted tools.
These platforms are extraordinary.
But they answer questions.
They do not determine which question should be asked.
Clinical reasoning begins earlier:
- Orientation.
- Thinking.
- Execution.
Evidence belongs primarily in the last.
In a new essay on The Blood Project – Thinking Before Searching – I explore why searching too early can actually distort clinical reasoning and why the most important educational task today may be teaching trainees how to frame the question before they search for the answer.
Evidence can guide action.
Thinking must guide evidence.”
Other posts featuring on William Aird Hemostasis Today.
-
Aug 14, 2026, 23:18Claire Hills: New Paper on Immune Surveillance and Immune Evasion of Senescent Cells
-
Aug 14, 2026, 23:16Are We Overlooking What Matters Most to Women with Von Willebrand Disease? – RPTH Journal
-
Aug 14, 2026, 23:15Markus Müller: A New Base Editing Approach Targeting PCSK9 to Lower Cholesterol Levels
-
Aug 14, 2026, 23:14Chokri Ben Lamine: Avatrombopag in Hematology – Dosing and Monitoring
-
Aug 14, 2026, 23:13Bianca Rocca: PRECISE-DAPT Score Identifies Bleeding Risk After CABG in Patients With POAF
-
Aug 14, 2026, 19:04Ravi Kumar: Why Lupus Anticoagulant Predicts Clots, Not Bleeding
-
Aug 14, 2026, 18:53Veli Bakalov: The Number Every Hematologist Should Know in Polycythemia Vera
-
Aug 14, 2026, 18:41Marta Velia Antonini: Can Nitric Oxide Protect the ECMO Circuit Without Systemic Anticoagulation?
-
Aug 14, 2026, 18:30Irina Gontschar: What the Epkinly FDA Review Teaches Us About Sponsor Oversight