{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"Journal of Public Health Research","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.jphres.us.com","author_name":"Jens Edrich","author_url":"https:\/\/www.jphres.us.com\/index.php\/author\/jens\/","title":"Pitfalls of counterfactual thinking in medical practice: preventing errors by using more functional reference points - Journal of Public Health Research","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"E5kDKB6an0\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.jphres.us.com\/index.php\/jphres\/article\/view\/234\/\">Pitfalls of counterfactual thinking in medical practice: preventing errors by using more functional reference points<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.jphres.us.com\/index.php\/jphres\/article\/view\/234\/embed\/#?secret=E5kDKB6an0\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"&#8220;Pitfalls of counterfactual thinking in medical practice: preventing errors by using more functional reference points&#8221; &#8212; Journal of Public Health Research\" data-secret=\"E5kDKB6an0\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n\/\/# sourceURL=https:\/\/www.jphres.us.com\/wp-includes\/js\/wp-embed.min.js\n<\/script>\n","description":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.4081\/jphr.2013.e24 John V. Petrocelli Department of Psychology, Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, NC, United States. ABSTRACT Background. Counterfactual thinking involves mentally simulating alternatives to reality. The current article reviews literature pertaining to the relevance counterfactual thinking has for the quality of medical decision making. Although earlier counterfactual thought research concluded that counterfactuals have important benefits for ... Read more"}