The Management Script: A Practical Tool for Teaching Management Reasoning

Reasoning on Rounds Volume 2: a Framework for Teaching Management Reasoning in the Inpatient Setting

Management reasoning (MR) is a key domain of clinical reasoning that is distinct from the more heavily studied and taught diagnostic reasoning (DR). Despite MR's importance to patient care, there are few published strategies for incorporating MR education into the clinical learning environment. In this perspective, the authors review key theories and clinical principles relevant to MR and integrate these concepts with previously described tools for teaching MR to provide frontline clinical teachers with practical, theory-informed framework for teaching MR during inpatient rounds.

Does management reasoning display context specificity? An exploration of sleep loss and other distracting situational (contextual) factors in clinical reasoning

OBJECTIVES

Context specificity occurs when a health professional sees two patients with identical signs and symptoms yet arrives at two different diagnoses due to other existing factors. For example, one patient speaks English as a first language, while the other patient has limited English proficiency. It is not known if context specificity extends beyond diagnosis and also affects management reasoning. Our study explored whether reduced sleep and other distracting contextual factors (e.g., limited English proficiency) lead to context specificity, resulting in suboptimal management reasoning.

METHODS

Seventeen medical residents participated in a two-month study (consisting of one outpatient and one inpatient rotation), in which their sleep was tracked. After each rotation, participants watched two clinical encounter videos-one with and one without distracting contextual factors-and completed think-aloud interviews for each video discussing their management plans. Interviews were transcribed and assessed for management reasoning themes.

RESULTS

Residents (n=17) on outpatient rotations received more sleep than those on inpatient rotations (450.5 min ± 7.13 vs. 425.6 min ± 10.78, p=0.023). Five management reasoning themes were identified: organized knowledge, disorganized knowledge, uncertainty, addressing non-pharmacologic interventions, and addressing patient needs and concerns. There was essentially no difference in the prevalence of utterances of organized knowledge themes between residents with more or less sleep (25 vs. 27 times, p=0.78) or those exposed to contextual factors vs. not exposed (24 vs. 28 times, p=0.58). However, disorganized knowledge themes were observed significantly more frequently in participants exposed to contextual factors (33 vs. 18 times, p=0.036).

CONCLUSIONS

Residents slept more during outpatient rotations. While sleep alone was not associated with the prevalence of management reasoning themes, residents exposed to videos with distracting contextual factors displayed significantly more instances of disorganized knowledge, supporting the phenomenon of context specificity in management reasoning.

GPT-4 assistance for improvement of physician performance on patient care tasks: a randomized controlled trial

While large language models (LLMs) have shown promise in diagnostic reasoning, their impact on management reasoning, which involves balancing treatment decisions and testing strategies while managing risk, is unknown. This prospective, randomized, controlled trial assessed whether LLM assistance improves physician performance on open-ended management reasoning tasks compared to conventional resources. From November 2023 to April 2024, 92 practicing physicians were randomized to use either GPT-4 plus conventional resources or conventional resources alone to answer five expert-developed clinical vignettes in a simulated setting. All cases were based on real, de-identified patient encounters, with information revealed sequentially to mirror the nature of clinical environments. The primary outcome was the difference in total score between groups on expert-developed scoring rubrics. Secondary outcomes included domain-specific scores and time spent per case. Physicians using the LLM scored significantly higher compared to those using conventional resources (mean difference = 6.5%, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 2.7 to 10.2, P < 0.001). LLM users spent more time per case (mean difference = 119.3 s, 95% CI = 17.4 to 221.2, P = 0.02). There was no significant difference between LLM-augmented physicians and LLM alone (-0.9%, 95% CI = -9.0 to 7.2, P = 0.8). LLM assistance can improve physician management reasoning in complex clinical vignettes compared to conventional resources and should be validated in real clinical practice. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT06208423 .

Beyond thinking fast and slow: Implications of a transtheoretical model of clinical reasoning and error on teaching, assessment, and research

From dual process to a family of theories known collectively as situativity, both micro and macro theories of cognition inform our current understanding of clinical reasoning (CR) and error. CR is a complex process that occurs in a complex environment, and a nuanced, expansive, integrated model of these theories is necessary to fully understand how CR is performed in the present day and in the future. In this perspective, we present these individual theories along with figures and descriptive cases for purposes of comparison before exploring the implications of a transtheoretical model of these theories for teaching, assessment, and research in CR and error.

Assessment of management reasoning: Design considerations drawn from analysis of simulated outpatient encounters

PURPOSE

Management reasoning is a distinct subset of clinical reasoning. We sought to explore features to be considered when designing assessments of management reasoning.

METHODS

This is a hybrid empirical research study, narrative review, and expert perspective. In 2021, we reviewed and discussed 10 videos of simulated (staged) physician-patient encounters, actively seeking actions that offered insights into assessment of management reasoning. We analyzed our own observations in conjunction with literature on clinical reasoning assessment, using a constant comparative qualitative approach.

RESULTS

Distinguishing features of management reasoning that will influence its assessment include management scripts, shared decision-making, process knowledge, illness-specific knowledge, and tailoring of the encounter and management plan. Performance domains that merit special consideration include communication, integration of patient preferences, adherence to the management script, and prognostication. Additional facets of encounter variation include the clinical problem, clinical and nonclinical patient characteristics (including preferences, values, and resources), team/system characteristics, and encounter features. We cataloged several relevant assessment approaches including written/computer-based, simulation-based, and workplace-based modalities, and a variety of novel response formats.

CONCLUSIONS

Assessment of management reasoning could be improved with attention to the performance domains, facets of variation, and variety of approaches herein identified.

Enhancing therapeutic reasoning: key insights and recommendations for education in prescribing

BACKGROUND

Despite efforts to improve undergraduate clinical pharmacology & therapeutics (CPT) education, prescribing errors are still made regularly. To improve CPT education and daily prescribing, it is crucial to understand how therapeutic reasoning works. Therefore, the aim of this study was to gain insight into the therapeutic reasoning process.

METHODS

A narrative literature review has been performed for literature on cognitive psychology and diagnostic and therapeutic reasoning.

RESULTS

Based on these insights, The European Model of Therapeutic Reasoning has been developed, building upon earlier models and insights from cognitive psychology. In this model, it can be assumed that when a diagnosis is made, a primary, automatic response as to what to prescribe arises based on pattern recognition via therapy scripts (type 1 thinking). At some point, this response may be evaluated by the reflective mind (using metacognition). If it is found to be incorrect or incomplete, an alternative response must be formulated through a slower, more analytical and deliberative process, known as type 2 thinking. Metacognition monitors the reasoning process and helps a person to form new therapy scripts after they have chosen an effective therapy. Experienced physicians have more and richer therapy scripts, mostly based on experience and enabling conditions, instead of textbook knowledge, and therefore their type 1 response is more often correct.

CONCLUSION

Because of the important role of metacognition in therapeutic reasoning, more attention should be paid to metacognition in CPT education. Both trainees and teachers should be aware of the possibility to monitor and influence these cognitive processes. Further research is required to investigate the applicability of these insights and the adaptability of educational approaches to therapeutic reasoning.

Reasoning Report: Engineering Case Conferences to Maximize Clinical Reasoning Education for All Learners

Case conferences, specifically those in which an unknown case is presented and discussed, are widely utilized in the delivery of medical education. However, the format of case conferences is not always optimized to engage and challenge audience members' clinical reasoning (CR). Based on the current conception of CR and our experience, we provide recommendations on how to better engineer case conferences to maximize CR education for learners at all levels through case selection, conference format, and intentional case construction.

Intervention skills - a neglected field of research in medical education and beyond

Intervention reasoning as a critical component of clinical reasoning has been understudied in medical education in contrast to the well-established field of diagnostic reasoning. This resonates in a lack of comprehensive understanding of the cognitive processes involved and a deficit in research to promote intervention skills in future clinicians. In this commentary, we present a conceptual framework for intervention reasoning that includes four phases: generating, selecting, implementing, and evaluating interventions. The conceptualization highlights cognitive processes such as developing interventions based on a patient's diagnosis and signs and symptoms; selecting the most appropriate option by contrasting, prioritizing, and evaluating interventions in terms of feasibility, effectiveness, and the patient's context-specific needs; and predicting patient outcomes within so-called "developmental corridors" to adjust treatments accordingly. In addition to these cognitive processes, interventions require collaborative activities, such as sharing information with other care providers, distributing roles among care teams, or acting together. Future research should validate the proposed framework, examine the impact of intervention reasoning on clinical outcomes, and identify effective training methods (e.g., simulation and AI-based approaches). In addition, it would be valuable to explore the transferability and generalizability of the model to other areas of health education and contexts outside of health education.

Large Language Model Influence on Management Reasoning: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Importance

Large language model (LLM) artificial intelligence (AI) systems have shown promise in diagnostic reasoning, but their utility in management reasoning with no clear right answers is unknown.

Objective

To determine whether LLM assistance improves physician performance on open-ended management reasoning tasks compared to conventional resources.

Design

Prospective, randomized controlled trial conducted from 30 November 2023 to 21 April 2024.

Setting

Multi-institutional study from Stanford University, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, and the University of Virginia involving physicians from across the United States.

Participants

92 practicing attending physicians and residents with training in internal medicine, family medicine, or emergency medicine.

Intervention

Five expert-developed clinical case vignettes were presented with multiple open-ended management questions and scoring rubrics created through a Delphi process. Physicians were randomized to use either GPT-4 via ChatGPT Plus in addition to conventional resources (e.g., UpToDate, Google), or conventional resources alone.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was difference in total score between groups on expert-developed scoring rubrics. Secondary outcomes included domain-specific scores and time spent per case.

Results

Physicians using the LLM scored higher compared to those using conventional resources (mean difference 6.5 %, 95% CI 2.7-10.2, p<0.001). Significant improvements were seen in management decisions (6.1%, 95% CI 2.5-9.7, p=0.001), diagnostic decisions (12.1%, 95% CI 3.1-21.0, p=0.009), and case-specific (6.2%, 95% CI 2.4-9.9, p=0.002) domains. GPT-4 users spent more time per case (mean difference 119.3 seconds, 95% CI 17.4-221.2, p=0.02). There was no significant difference between GPT-4-augmented physicians and GPT-4 alone (-0.9%, 95% CI -9.0 to 7.2, p=0.8).

Conclusions and Relevance

LLM assistance improved physician management reasoning compared to conventional resources, with particular gains in contextual and patient-specific decision-making. These findings indicate that LLMs can augment management decision-making in complex cases.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT06208423; https://classic.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT06208423.

Framework and Schema are False Synonyms: Defining Terms to Improve Learning

Clinical reasoning is an essential expertise of health care professionals that includes the complex cognitive processes that lead to diagnosis and management decisions. In order to optimally teach, learn, and assess clinical reasoning, it is imperative for teachers and learners to have a shared understanding of the language. Currently, educators use the terms schema and framework interchangeably but they are distinct concepts. In this paper, we offer definitions for schema and framework and use the high-stakes field of aviation to demonstrate the interplay of these concepts. We offer examples of framework and schema in the medical education field and discuss how a clear understanding of these concepts allows for greater intentionality when teaching and assessing clinical reasoning.

The future of teaching management reasoning: important questions and potential solutions

Management reasoning is distinct from but inextricably linked to diagnostic reasoning in the iterative process that is clinical reasoning. Complex and situated, management reasoning skills are distinct from diagnostic reasoning skills and must be developed in order to promote cogent clinical decisions. While there is growing interest in teaching management reasoning, key educational questions remain regarding when it should be taught, how it can best be taught in the clinical setting, and how it can be taught in a way that helps mitigate implicit bias. Here, we describe several useful tools to structure teaching of management reasoning across learner levels and educational settings. The management script provides a scaffold for organizing knowledge around management and can serve as a springboard for discussion of uncertainty, thresholds, high-value care, and shared decision-making. The management pause reserves space for management discussions and exploration of a learner's reasoning. Finally, the equity reflection invites learners to examine management decisions from a health equity perspective, promoting the practice of metacognition around implicit bias. These tools are easily deployable, and - when used regularly - foster a learning environment primed for the successful teaching of management reasoning.

Diagnostic Schemas: Form and Function

Diagnostic schemas are frameworks that depict organized clinical knowledge and serve as a bridge between problem representation and differential diagnosis generation. Schema-based problem solving is increasingly used among clinician educators and is widely featured in digital media. We examine the origins of schemas and their theoretical background, review existing literature on their applications in medicine, and explore their utility for learners and teachers.

Management Reasoning: Empirical Determination of Key Features and a Conceptual Model

PURPOSE

Management reasoning is a critical yet understudied phenomenon in clinical practice and medical education. The authors sought to empirically identify key features of management reasoning and construct a model describing the management reasoning process.

METHOD

In November 2020, 4 investigators each reviewed 10 video clips of simulated outpatient physician-patient encounters and used a coding form to document key features and insights related to management reasoning. The team used a constant comparative approach to distill 120 pages of raw observations into an 18-page list of management tasks, processes, and insights. The team then had a series of discussions to iteratively refine these findings into a parsimonious model of management reasoning.

RESULTS

The investigators empirically identified 12 distinct features of management reasoning: contrasting and selection among multiple solutions; prioritization of patient, clinician, and system preferences and constraints; communication and shared decision making; ongoing monitoring and adjustment of the management plan; dynamic interplay among people, systems, and competing priorities; illness-specific knowledge; process knowledge; management scripts; clinician roles as patient teacher and salesperson; clinician-patient relationship; prognostication; and organization of the clinical encounter (sequencing and time management). Management scripts seemed to play a prominent and critical role. The model of management reasoning comprised 4 steps: instantiation of a management script, identifying (multiple) options and beginning to teach the patient, shared decision making, and ongoing monitoring and adjustment. This model also conceives 2 overarching features: that management reasoning is personalized to the patient and that it occurs between individuals rather than exclusively within the clinician's mind.

CONCLUSIONS

Management scripts constitute a key feature of management reasoning, along with teaching patients about viable options, shared decision making, ongoing monitoring and adjustment, and personalization. Management reasoning seems to be constructed and negotiated between individuals rather than exclusively within the clinician.

Management reasoning scripts: Qualitative exploration using simulated physician-patient encounters

INTRODUCTION

Management reasoning is distinct from diagnostic reasoning and remains incompletely understood. The authors sought to empirically investigate the concept of management scripts.

METHODS

In November 2020, 4 investigators each reviewed 10 video clips of simulated outpatient physician-patient encounters, and used a coding form to document observations about management reasoning. The team used constant comparative analysis to integrate empirically-grounded insights with theories related to cognitive scripts and Type 1/Type 2 thinking.

RESULTS

Management scripts are precompiled conceptual knowledge structures that represent and connect management options and clinician tasks in a temporal or logical sequence. Management scripts appear to differ substantially from illness scripts. Management scripts varied in quality (in content, sequence, flexibility, and fluency) and generality. The authors empirically identified six key features (components) of management scripts: the problem (diagnosis); management options; preferences, values, and constraints; education needs; interactions; and encounter flow. The authors propose a heuristic framework describing script activation, selection, instantiation with case-specific details, and application to guide development of the management plan. They further propose that management reasoning reflects iterative, back-and-forth involvement of both Type 1 (non-analytic, effortless) and Type 2 (analytic, effortful) thinking. Type 1 thinking likely influences initial script activation, selection, and initial instantiation. Type 2 increasingly influences subsequent script revisions, as activation, selection, and instantiation become more deliberate (effortful) and more hypothetical (involving mental simulation).

DISCUSSION

Management scripts constitute a key feature of management reasoning, and could represent a new target for training in clinical reasoning (distinct from illness scripts).

How to Keep Training-After Residency Training

Lifelong learning in medicine is an important skill and ethical obligation, but many residents do not feel prepared to be effective self-directed learners when training ends. The learning sciences offer evidence to guide self-directed learning, but these insights have not been integrated into a practical and actionable plan for residents to improve their clinical knowledge and reasoning. We encourage residents to establish a self-directed learning plan, just as an athlete employs a training plan in the pursuit of excellence. We highlight four evidence-based learning principles (spaced practice, mixed practice, retrieval practice, and feedback) and four training strategies comprising a weekly training plan: case tracking, simulated cases, quizzing, and new evidence integration. We provide tips for residents to implement and refine their approach and discuss how residency programs can foster these routines and habits. By optimizing their scarce self-directed learning time with a training plan, residents may enhance patient care and their career satisfaction through their pursuit of clinical mastery.

Morning report for all: a qualitative study of disseminating case conferences via podcasting

BACKGROUND

Despite its long-established importance, diagnostic reasoning (DR) education has suffered uneven implementation in medical education. The Clinical Problem Solvers (CPSolvers) podcast has emerged as a novel strategy to help teach DR through case conferences with expert diagnosticians and trainees. CPSolvers has 25,000 listeners in 147 countries. The aim of this study was to evaluate the podcast by eliciting the developers' goals of the podcast, then determining to what extent they aligned with the listeners' actual usage habits, features they valued, and perceptions of the podcast.

METHODS

We conducted semi-structured interviews with 3 developers and 8 listeners from April-May 2020, followed by qualitative thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Three major developer goals with sub-goals resulted: 1. To teach diagnostic reasoning in a case-based format by (1a) teaching schemas, (1b) modeling expert diagnostic reasoning, (1c) teaching clinical knowledge, and (1d) teaching diagnostic reasoning terminology. 2. To change the culture of medicine by (2a) promoting diversity, (2b) modeling humility and promoting psychological safety, and (2c) creating a fun, casual way to learn. 3. To democratize the teaching of diagnostic reasoning by leveraging technology. Listeners' usage habits, valued features, and perceptions overall strongly aligned with all these aspects, except for (1c) clinical knowledge, and (1d) diagnostic reasoning terminology. Listeners identified (1a) schemas, and (2c) promotion of psychological safety as the most valuable features of the podcast.

CONCLUSION

CPSolvers has been perceived as a highly effective and novel way to disseminate DR education in the form of case conferences, serving as an alternative to traditional in-person case conferences suspended during COVID-19. CPSolvers combines many known benefits of in-person case conferences with a compassionate and entertaining teaching style, plus advantages of the podcasting medium - democratizing morning report for listeners around the world.