Even if clinicians do act consistently it is possible that their decisions are consistently biased. People put different values on gains and losses. Tversky and Kahneman gave people the two identical problems (with the same probabilities of life and death outcomes - see fig 1) but framed the outcome choices as either lives saved or as Most people wanted to avoid taking risks with gains which could be safeguarded, but would take risks with losses which might be avoided; this is a framing effect. If people are given identical options but different words are used to emphasize a gain rather than a loss, then a different response is given by a large proportion of the population under study. Such a change in response appears to be inconsistent. 
The rule against hearsay is deceptively simple and full of exceptions. Hearsay is an out of court statement, made in court, to prove the truth of the matter asserted . In other words, hearsay is evidence of a statement that was made other than by a witness while testifying at the hearing in question and that is offered to prove the truth of the matter stated. For example, Witness A in a murder trial claimed on the stand: "Witness B (the "declarant") told me that the defendant killed the victim." The definition of hearsay is not too difficult to understand. But the matter can become very confusing when one considers all of the many exceptions to the general rule against hearsay.