How to Think About Investigations

Why, When, and How We Order Tests

Every Test Must Answer a Question Think First · Test Second The Right Test — Not Many Tests
Reminder

Do not order 20 investigations
before thinking.

The sequence History and examination come first. Investigations support clinical reasoning — they do not replace it. A test ordered before thinking is a test without a purpose.
The standard Good clinicians do not order many tests. They order the right tests — chosen because they answer a specific, pre-stated clinical question.
The obligation If you cannot state the question the test is answering, you should not order the test.
Core Principle
"An investigation must answer a question."

State the question before you order the test. If you cannot — rethink.

Purposes

Why do we investigate? — two tiers, five purposes

Diagnostic Tier
Used to establish or rule out a diagnosis
1

Confirm a Diagnosis

You already suspect the disease. The test verifies it.
Examples Suspected ALL → FBC + peripheral smear.
Suspected nephrotic syndrome → urine protein.
2

Exclude a Diagnosis

You are not proving your main diagnosis — you are ruling out a dangerous alternative.
Example Child with wheeze + unilateral reduced air entry → chest X-ray to exclude foreign body aspiration.
Management Tier
Used to guide decisions after the diagnosis is established
3

Detect Complications

The diagnosis is known. You are assessing severity or disease consequences.
Examples Nephrotic syndrome → renal function + lipid profile.
Severe asthma → blood gases.
4

Monitor Progress

Treatment is running. You are checking whether the patient is responding.
Examples TB → clinical and radiological response.
Leukaemia → blood counts during chemotherapy.
5

Plan Management

The result will directly change what you do next.
Examples Before chemotherapy → baseline renal + liver function.
Before surgery → coagulation profile if indicated.
Approach

Two ways to use investigations — both are valid, both require logic

Testing Approach

Hypothesis-Driven vs. Exploratory Testing

Approach A — Hypothesis-Driven

You expect a specific result

You suspect a disease. You order a test expecting a particular result. The result either strengthens or challenges your hypothesis. This is scientific clinical reasoning.

Example Suspected iron deficiency → expect low ferritin, low MCV, low MCH.
Result matches → diagnosis strengthened.
Result does not match → rethink the hypothesis.
Approach B — Exploratory

You are gathering information

Sometimes you genuinely do not know. The presentation is undifferentiated. You order baseline investigations to narrow the field. This is legitimate — but must still be logical, not random.

Example Unexplained fever of unknown origin → FBC, CRP, blood culture, urinalysis.
Each test has a reason — together they map the territory.
Both approaches are valid. The difference is not in the tests ordered — it is in whether the clinician has a reason for each test. Exploratory testing that is logical and purposeful is good medicine. Random testing — even if it accidentally finds something — is not.
New Addition — A Critical Skill

What if the result surprises you?

When a result does not match your expectation, it is one of the most important moments in clinical reasoning. Do not dismiss it — and do not panic. Work through it systematically.

1
Check the sample first. Was it labelled correctly? Was there haemolysis or a processing error? A result that makes no clinical sense may be a laboratory issue.
2
Reconsider the diagnosis. Could the unexpected result be telling you something true? Is there a disease you have not yet considered that this result would fit?
3
Do not dismiss unexpected findings. Incidental findings and unexpected results have led to important diagnoses. Treat them as new information — not as noise to ignore.
4
Repeat if necessary. A single unexpected result on a test prone to variability is worth repeating before acting on it. Clinical decisions should rarely rest on one anomalous result alone.
Safety

Before ordering — is it safe?

Contraindications

Not every investigation is safe for every patient

CT Scan

Radiation exposure

Particularly relevant in paediatrics where cumulative radiation risk is higher. Consider whether a non-ionising alternative (ultrasound, MRI) answers the same question.

Contrast Studies

Renal impairment risk

Iodinated contrast can cause contrast-induced nephropathy. Check renal function before ordering. Hydration and dose minimisation are important precautions.

Lumbar Puncture

Raised intracranial pressure

LP in the presence of raised ICP risks tonsillar herniation. Always assess for papilloedema and focal neurology before proceeding. CT head first if in doubt.

Checklist

Before You Order — five questions, every time

The Pre-Investigation Checklist

Five Questions Before Every Test

Apply these before ordering any investigation — at the bedside, on the ward, in the exam.
01

What am I looking for?

State the specific question this test will answer. If you cannot, do not order it.

02

Is it indicated?

Does the clinical picture justify this test? Does it serve one of the five purposes?

03

Is it safe?

Are there contraindications for this patient? Radiation, renal function, ICP?

04

What if positive?

What will you do if the result confirms the diagnosis or concern?

05

What if negative?

Will a negative result reassure you or change your management? If not — why order it?

If the result will not change what you do — you should not order the test. This is the most powerful filter. Tests that are ordered "just in case" or "for completeness" fail this criterion every time.
Step 1

History

Step 2

Examination

Step 3

Hypothesis

Step 4

Investigation

Step 5

Reassessment

Investigation sits in the middle of the clinical process — not at the beginning. History and examination generate the hypothesis. The investigation tests it. Reassessment interprets the result.

This sequence connects directly to earlier frameworks in this series. Note 3 (Predict–Treat–Reassess) covers how reassessment follows treatment. Note 6 (Visit–Revisit) covers how history and examination inform each other iteratively before a hypothesis is formed. Investigations are the bridge between the hypothesis and the management decision.
Common Student Errors

What poor investigative thinking looks like

Ordering tests before forming a clinical hypothesis
Ordering everything "just in case" — without a stated purpose for each
Not knowing what result to expect before the test is run
Not knowing what to do when an abnormal result returns
Ignoring contraindications to investigation
Dismissing an unexpected result rather than reconsidering the diagnosis
Final Take-Home Message
"Investigations are tools.
Not decorations. Not routines.
Not replacements for thinking."

Good clinicians do not order many tests.
They order the right tests — at the right time — for the right reason.

Think first Test second Act responsibly
Home