title: Reliability of distance estimation by doctors and patients: cross sectional study.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To assess the reliability and accuracy of distance estimated by doctors and patients.
  
  
  METHODS
  Comparison between estimated and measured distances of six familiar sites around Guy's Hospital, London.
  
  
  METHODS
  100 hospital consultants and 100 patients.
  
  
  METHODS
  Median (range) of estimated distances, and mean (SD) of the difference between estimated and measured distances.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Both doctors and patients gave a wide range of estimates of distance. The estimates differed by up to 14.6-fold from the measured distances, and the difference between minimum and maximum estimates was up to 62.5-fold.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Doctors and patients were inaccurate at estimating distances, which implies that estimates of distances walked are not reliable indicators of a person's health.
authors.affiliation: Department of Neurology, United Medical School, Guy's Hospital, London.
authors.forename: B
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Sharrack
authors.forename: R A
authors.initials: RA
authors.lastname: Hughes
mesh_terms: D003430:Cross-Sectional Studies; D004215:Distance Perception; D006801:Humans; D010361:Patients / Q000523:psychology*; D010820:Physicians / Q000523:psychology*; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity; D016138:Walking