Clinical reasoning processes: unravelling complexity through graphical representation

Quantify difference between physicians and medical students in clinical reasoning: evidence from eye-tracking

BACKGROUND

The assessment of clinical reasoning in health trainees is vital yet poses challenges. We tracked the eye movements of participants while they were reviewing a neurological case with the goal of finding behavioral evidence to improve health education.

METHODS

Eleven medical students and seventeen expert physicians were required to read a neurological case within a 150-second timeframe. The case included descriptive text, a brain CT scan, and an electrocardiogram (ECG). Participants completed a multiple-choice questions (MCQs) test after reading the case. Eye movements of participants in case reading on eleven patient-related information areas (PRIAs) were compared between experts and novices, contrasted with the remaining areas.

RESULTS

Experts spent significantly more time fixating on PRIAs during case reading than novices (42.1% vs. 29.2%, adjusted p = 0.010). Experts demonstrated significantly fewer gaze shifts between Text and CT images (2.0 times) and between CT and ECG images (2.4 times) compared to novices (6.2 and 5.4 times), with adjusted p-values of 0.002 and 0.019, respectively. A positive correlation was found between the fixation rate on PRIAs and MCQs outcome (r = 0.402, p = 0.034).

CONCLUSION

Eye-tracking provides rich and reliable data reflecting physicians' ability to gather patient-relevant information during patient assessment.

Statins for primary prevention in multimorbid patients: to prescribe or not to prescribe? A qualitative analysis of general practitioners' decision-making processes

INTRODUCTION

A better understanding of the determinants involved in general practitioners' (GPs) decision-making processes when it comes to prescribing statins as primary prevention in patients with multimorbidity could provide insights for improving implementation of primary prevention guidelines.

METHODS

We conducted a qualitative study using a deductive framework-based and inductive analysis of GPs' semi-structured interviews verbatim, from which expertise profiles of prescribers were also drawn. The analytical framework was built from a pragmatic synthesis of the evidence-based medicine, Modelling using Typified Objects (MOT) model of clinical reasoning processes, Theoretical Domains Framework, and shared decision-making frameworks.

RESULTS

Fifteen GPs were interviewed between June 2019 and January 2020. Diabetes seemed to represent a specific motivation for deciding about statin prescription for primary prevention purposes; and in situations of multimorbidity, GPs differentiated between cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular multimorbidity. Expert prescribers seemed to have integrated the utilisation of cardiovascular risk calculation scores throughout their practice, whereas non-expert prescribers considered them difficult to interpret and preferred using more of a "rule of thumb" process. One interviewee used the risk calculation score as a support for discussing statin prescription with the patient.

CONCLUSION

Our results shed light on the reasons why statins remain under-prescribed for primary prevention and why non-diabetic multimorbid patients have even lower odds of being prescribed a statin. They call for a change in the use of risk assessment scores, by placing them as decision aids, to support and improve personalised shared decision-making discussions as an efficient approach to improve the implementation of recommendations about statins for primary prevention.

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.

Collaborative Development of Feedback Concept Maps for Virtual Patient-Based Clinical Reasoning Education: Mixed Methods Study

Background

Concept maps are a suitable method for teaching clinical reasoning (CR). For example, in a concept map, findings, tests, differential diagnoses, and treatment options can be documented and connected to each other. When combined with virtual patients, automated feedback can be provided to the students' concept maps. However, as CR is a nonlinear process, feedback concept maps that are created together by several individuals might address this issue and cover perspectives from different health professionals.

Objective

In this study, we aimed to develop a collaborative process for creating feedback concept maps in virtual patient-based CR education.

Methods

Health professionals of different specialties, nationalities, and levels of experience in education individually created concept maps and afterward reached a consensus on them in structured workshops. Then, medical students discussed the health professionals' concept maps in focus groups. We performed a qualitative content analysis of the transcribed audio records and field notes and a descriptive comparison of the produced concept maps.

Results

A total of 14 health professionals participated in 4 workshops, each with 3-4 participants. In each workshop, they reached a consensus on 1 concept map, after discussing content and presentation, as well as rationales, and next steps. Overall, the structure of the workshops was well-received. The comparison of the produced concept maps showed that they varied widely in their scope and content. Consensus concept maps tended to contain more nodes and connections than individual ones. A total of 9 medical students participated in 2 focus groups of 4 and 5 participants. Their opinions on the concept maps' features varied widely, balancing between the wish for an in-depth explanation and the flexibility of CR.

Conclusions

Although the number of participating health professionals and students was relatively low, we were able to show that consensus workshops are a constructive method to create feedback concept maps that include different perspectives of health professionals with content that is useful to and accepted by students. Further research is needed to determine which features of feedback concept maps are most likely to improve learner outcomes and how to facilitate their construction in collaborative consensus workshops.

A graphical model to make explicit pharmacist clinical reasoning during medication review

Pharmacists' roles have evolved substantially from traditional drug compounding and dispensing to encompass patient-centred clinical services. Pharmacist clinical reasoning, though fundamental to these new roles, generally remains implicit and understudied, particularly compared with that of other healthcare professionals, such as physicians. However, teaching and supervising the clinical services provided by pharmacists require a thorough understanding of the reasoning process involved. Several models describing pharmacist clinical reasoning have been developed, but they lack unified mapping. Here, we used an instrumental case study approach to develop a model of pharmacist clinical reasoning during medication review. Our model is adapted from a previously published modelling-using-typified-objects model of physician clinical reasoning in all its cognitive complexity. Our pharmacist model, validated after iterative development and expert consultation, aligns components of pharmacist clinical reasoning with those of physician clinical reasoning. The clinical case contains drug-related problems of variable clinical relevance, as well as numerous key elements (e.g., laboratory results, vital signs) necessary for conducting a medication review. The case serves both as the foundation for model development and as an illustrative step-by-step example within this article. Our model delineates the subprocesses of pharmacist clinical reasoning during medication review, offering a flexible, multipath structure that underscores the dynamic, nonlinear nature of the reasoning. The model might be able to clarify implicit cognitive processes, thus furthering the overarching objective of promoting reflective skill development among learners rather than relying solely on tacit knowledge gained through practice experience.

[The expert panel for Script Concordance Tests: A truly adequate reference?]

The Script Concordance Tests (SCTs) are an examination modality introduced by decree in the French National Ranking Exam for medical students in 2024. Their objective is to evaluate clinical reasoning in situations of uncertainty. In practice, SCTs assess the impact of new information on the probability of a hypothesis formulated a priori based on an authentic clinical scenario. This approach resembles probabilistic (or Bayesian) reasoning. Due to the uncertainty associated with the explored clinical situation, SCTs do not compare the student's response to an expected one in a theoretical knowledge reference. Instead, the distribution of responses from a panel of experienced physicians is used to establish the question's scoring scale. Literature data suggest that physicians, even experienced ones, like most humans, often exhibit biased intuitive probabilistic reasoning. These biases raise questions about the relevance of using expert panel responses as scoring scales for SCTs.

Serious Game for the Nursing Assessment of Home-Dwelling Older Adults: Development and Validation Study

BACKGROUND

The use of serious games (SGs) in nursing education is increasing, with the COVID-19 pandemic significantly accelerating their development. A key feature of SGs is their flexibility, allowing students to train at any place and time as needed. Recently, there has been a shift from developing disease-specific SGs to games focused on broader health issues. However, there has been a lack of proposals to enhance nursing interventions in home and frail care settings. The REACtion project developed a SG to improve students' understanding and clinical reasoning in caring for home-dwelling older adults.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to describe the development of "REACtion Game" (RG) and explore its validity as an educational tool. A multidisciplinary team created a SG that simulates the assessment process of older adults in home settings by nurses. It features web-based scenarios, clickable objects, and a menu with tools, and medical records to enhance nursing students' knowledge and clinical reasoning skills.

METHODS

A prospective, observational study was conducted using the Dutch Society for Simulation in Healthcare's framework to validate the game. Further, 5 experts in home health care nursing evaluated content validity, while 30 students assessed construct validity, face validity, concurrent validity (by comparing game scores with those from the Nursing Clinical Reasoning Scale), game quality, and usability. Data were collected through self-administered web-based questionnaires and the debriefings of each match played. The students were enrolled in 2 postgraduate nursing programs: a master of science in nursing degree and a first-level continuing education in family and community nursing.

RESULTS

Experts rated the content validity highly after revisions (universal agreement calculation method of scale-level content validity index=0.97). The sample consisted of 30 students, predominantly women (n=20, 67%) and aged younger than 45 years (n=23, 77%) with no prior experience in SG. Almost all students had a positive impression of RG as an attractive and useful method for learning new knowledge. Participants found the cases, scenarios, and dialogues realistic (face validity) and of high quality, though usability aspects such as instructions clarity and intelligibility of game progression were less favored. Construct validity showed general agreement on the game's educational value, with family and community nursing students reporting more consistent alignment with educational goals. Overall, RG scores correlated positively with time spent playing but showed limited correlation with Nursing Clinical Reasoning Scale scores.

CONCLUSIONS

This study developed and validated a nursing education game, especially valuable as simulation is underused in some curricula. Created during the pandemic, it offered a digital learning environment. Although the game shows potential, further testing is needed for usability, concurrent validity, and functional improvements. Future research should involve larger samples to fully validate the game and assess its impact on academic achievement.

Interprofessional clinical reasoning education

Clinical reasoning is considered one of the most important competencies but is not included in most healthcare curricula. The number and diversity of patient encounters are the decisive factors in the development of clinical reasoning competence. Physical real patient encounters are considered optimal, but virtual patient cases also promote clinical reasoning. A high-volume, low-fidelity virtual patient library thus can support clinical reasoning training in a safe environment and can be tailored to the needs of learners from different health care professions. It may also stimulate interprofessional understanding and team shared decisions. Implementation will be challenged by tradition, the lack of educator competence and prior experience as well as the high-density curricula at medical and veterinary schools and will need explicit address from curriculum managers and education leads.

Promoting Longitudinal and Developmental Computer-Based Assessments of Clinical Reasoning: Validity Evidence for a Clinical Reasoning Mapping Exercise

PURPOSE

Clinical reasoning is vitally important for practitioners across the health professions. However, the assessment of clinical reasoning remains a significant challenge. Combined with other assessment methods, non-workplace-based assessment can increase opportunities to address multiple components of clinical reasoning, evaluate growth, and foster learning, but tools with validity evidence to assess clinical reasoning outside the workplace are scare. This study examined validity evidence for a novel clinical reasoning mapping exercise (CResME).

METHOD

Data include CResME performance scores from 120 third-year medical students at the University of Central Florida for 3 topics in May 2022. Each CResME was scored by 2 physician raters based on a scoring rubric that included a combined diagnosis and sequence score. Descriptive statistics were used to examine trends in scores. The authors gathered validity evidence for response process, internal structure, and relations to other variables.

RESULTS

The overall mean (SD) score across cases was 66 (29). Internal consistency reliability of cases (Cronbach α) ranged from 0.75 to 0.91. The Phi and G coefficients were 0.45 and 0.56, respectively. Students accounted for 10% of the total variance, indicating the ability to differentiate high and low clinical reasoning skills; the interaction between learner and case accounted for 8.1% of the variance, demonstrating case specificity. There was a moderate correlation between the overall CResME scores and the mean overall score of patient encounter notes from an objective structured clinical examination performed at the end of the third year (0.46; P = .001). Significant associations were also found between the CResME scores and subject exam scores.

CONCLUSIONS

The CResME can be used to facilitate the assessment of clinical reasoning, supporting the developmental progress of learners throughout the curriculum. Future research is needed to gather validity evidence for CResMEs with different learners across different settings and formats.

A proposal for a universal physical therapy diagnostic concept

BACKGROUND

In Canada, as in other countries, the physical therapist (PT) must make a diagnosis to comply with direct access responsibilities. This means making a diagnosis is an entry-to-practice essential competency. However, there is no consensus across physical therapy practice domains and contexts regarding the diagnostic concept, i.e., the classification system, labelling and diagnostic format that should be used.

OBJECTIVE

To propose a universal diagnostic concept, one a PT could use regardless of their practice domain or context.

METHODS

The relevant scientific and grey literature (1986-2022) were searched and key information was synthesized.

RESULTS

Information from 194 retained documents (8506 identified) was synthesized to a list of seven essential criteria that were then used to develop a universal physical therapy diagnostic concept (PT-Dx-C). The PT-Dx-C format consists of three labels in the following order: (1) health problem, (2) primary impairment, and (3) primary activity limitation or participation restriction. Label definitions are those used by the World Health Organization. The specific health problem, impairment, and limitation or restriction making up the diagnosis are determined for each patient using valid tests and measures.

CONCLUSIONS

The PT-Dx-C is consistent with best practices and could be applied to all patients, in all PT practice domains and contexts. It reflects the PT's expertise in the human movement system and their unique contribution to health care. Furthermore, its use may allow for communication of the PT's conclusions in a manner that can be understood by others thereby facilitating collaborative practice.

Reasoning like a doctor or like a nurse? A systematic integrative review

When physicians and nurses are looking at the same patient, they may not see the same picture. If assuming that the clinical reasoning of both professions is alike and ignoring possible differences, aspects essential for care can be overlooked. Understanding the multifaceted concept of clinical reasoning of both professions may provide insight into the nature and purpose of their practices and benefit patient care, education and research. We aimed to identify, compare and contrast the documented features of clinical reasoning of physicians and nurses through the lens of layered analysis and to conduct a simultaneous concept analysis. The protocol of this systematic integrative review was published doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-049862. A comprehensive search was performed in four databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Psychinfo, and Web of Science) from 30th March 2020 to 27th May 2020. A total of 69 Empirical and theoretical journal articles about clinical reasoning of practitioners were included: 27 nursing, 37 medical, and five combining both perspectives. Two reviewers screened the identified papers for eligibility and assessed the quality of the methodologically diverse articles. We used an onion model, based on three layers: Philosophy, Principles, and Techniques to extract and organize the data. Commonalities and differences were identified on professional paradigms, theories, intentions, content, antecedents, attributes, outcomes, and contextual factors. The detected philosophical differences were located on a care-cure and subjective-objective continuum. We observed four principle contrasts: a broad or narrow focus, consideration of the patient as such or of the patient and his relatives, hypotheses to explain or to understand, and argumentation based on causality or association. In the technical layer a difference in the professional concepts of diagnosis and the degree of patient involvement in the reasoning process were perceived. Clinical reasoning can be analysed by breaking it down into layers, and the onion model resulted in detailed features. Subsequently insight was obtained in the differences between nursing and medical reasoning. The origin of these differences is in the philosophical layer (professional paradigms, intentions). This review can be used as a first step toward gaining a better understanding and collaboration in patient care, education and research across the nursing and medical professions.

Defining the tasks of clinical reasoning in forensic psychiatric evaluation: Psychomedicolegal analysis competency

Objective

Inconsistency in the quality of forensic psychiatry report has been criticized for several years. Yet, there are limited guidelines to provide minimally satisfactory forensic psychiatry evaluation conducted by psychiatrists. In addition to the impact towards the forensic psychiatry service, this lack of standardized guidelines may impact the relevant competency development and its various teaching methods of forensic psychiatry among general psychiatrists. Therefore, this study aims to identify components of psychomedicolegal analysis competency as a form of clinical reasoning in forensic psychiatry.

Methods

A comprehensive literature review and expert panel discussions were conducted simultaneously to formulate an initial list of psychomedicolegal analysis competency. A total of fourteen experts were chosen based on their expertise in different disciplines that have intersections with forensic psychiatry and the general psychiatry curriculum (e.g. general psychiatrist, forensic psychiatrists and psychologist, law practitioner, and medical education director). The expert panel were instructed to score and provide feedbacks on the items of the initial list. Four-point Likert scale were used in order for the experts to express the relevancy of the core competence to forensic psychiatry practice until it reached the consensus.

Results

The final 60 items of psychomedicolegal analysis competency were developed after three rounds of Delphi technique and reached a consensus (>70% and medians score of at least 3,25). These competency then categorized into four steps 1) preparing the case (Item 1-11), 2) conducting the evaluation (Item 12-41), 3) writing the report (42-51), and 4) giving expert opinion in court (Item 52-60).

Conclusion

We developed 60 items of psychomedicolegal analysis competency that can be used as a standardized guide for psychiatrists to conduct forensic psychiatry evaluation, write the report and provide expert opinion in court. Implementation of this guideline can be used to shape further forensic psychiatry education for general psychiatrist and psychiatry residency.

Does it make sense to use written instruments to assess communication skills? Systematic review on the concurrent and predictive value of written assessment for performance

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate possible associations between learners' results in written and performance-based assessments of communication skills (CS), either in concurrent or predictive study designs.

METHODS

Search included four databases for peer-reviewed studies containing both written and performance-based CS assessment. Eleven studies met the inclusion criteria.

RESULTS

Included studies predominantly assessed undergraduate medical students. Studies reported mainly low to medium correlations between written and performance-based assessment results (Objective Structured Clinical Examinations or encounters with simulated patients), and gave correlation coefficients ranging from 0.13 to 0.53 (p < 0.05). Higher correlations were reported when specific CS, like motivational interviewing were assessed. Only a few studies gave sufficient reliability indicators of both assessment formats.

CONCLUSIONS

Written assessment scores seem to predict performance-based assessments to a limited extent but cannot replace them entirely. Reporting of assessment instruments' psychometric properties is essential to improve the interpretation of future findings and could possibly affect their predictive validity for performance.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Within longitudinal CS assessment programs, triangulation of assessment including written assessment is recommended, taking into consideration possible limitations. Written assessments with feedback can help students and trainers to elaborate on procedural knowledge as a strong support for the acquisition and transfer of CS to different contexts.

A GP's clinical reasoning in the context of multimorbidity: beyond the perception of an intuitive approach

INTRODUCTION

GP's clinical reasoning processes in the context of patients suffering from multimorbidity are often a process which remains implicit. Therefore, the goal of this case study analysis is to gain a better understanding of the processes at play in the management of patients suffering from multimorbidity.

METHODS

A case study analysis, using a qualitative thematic analysis was conducted. This case follows a 54-year-old woman who has been under the care of her GP for almost 10 years and suffers from a number of chronic conditions. The clinical reasoning of an experienced GP who can explicitly unfold his processes was chosen for this case analysis.

RESULTS

Four main themes emerged from this case analysis: The different roles that GPs have to manage; the GP's cognitive flexibility and continual adaptation of their clinical reasoning processes, the patient's empowerment, and the challenges related to the collaboration with specialists and healthcare professionals.

CONCLUSION

This could help GPs gain a clearer understanding of their clinical reasoning processes and motivate them to communicate their findings with others during clinical supervision or teaching. Furthermore, this may emphasize the importance of valuing the role of the primary care physician in the management of multimorbid patients.

Clinical Reasoning Curricula in Health Professions Education: A Scoping Review

OBJECTIVES

This scoping review aimed to explore and synthesize current literature to advance the understanding of how to design clinical reasoning (CR) curricula for students in health professions education.

METHODS

Arksey and O'Malley's 6-stage framework was applied. Peer-reviewed articles were searched in PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL, and manual searches, resulting in the identification of 2932 studies.

RESULTS

Twenty-six articles were included on CR in medical, nursing, physical therapy, occupational therapy, midwifery, dentistry, and speech language therapy education. The results describe: features of CR curriculum design; CR theories, models, and frameworks that inform curricula; and teaching content, methods, and assessments that inform CR curricula.

CONCLUSIONS

Several CR theories, teaching, and assessment methods are integrated into CR curricula, reflecting the multidimensionality of CR among professions. Specific CR elements are addressed in several curricula; however, no all-encompassing CR curriculum design has been identified. These findings offer useful insights for educators into how CR can be taught and assessed, but they also suggest the need for further guidance on educational strategies and assessments while learners progress through an educational program.

Formative Assessment of Diagnostic Testing in Family Medicine with Comprehensive MCQ Followed by Certainty-Based Mark

INTRODUCTION

The choice of diagnostic tests in front of a given clinical case is a major part of medical reasoning. Failure to prescribe the right test can lead to serious diagnostic errors. Furthermore, unnecessary medical tests are a waste of money and could possibly generate injuries to patients, especially in family medicine.

METHODS

In an effort to improve the training of our students to the choice of laboratory and imaging studies, we implemented a specific multiple-choice questions (MCQ), called comprehensive MCQ (cMCQ), with a fixed and high number of options matching various basic medical tests, followed by a certainty-based mark (CBM). This tool was used in the assessment of diagnostic test choice in various clinical cases of general practice in 456 sixth-year medical students.

RESULTS

The scores were significantly correlated with the traditional exams (standard MCQ), with matched themes. The proportion of "cMCQ/CBM score" variance explained by "standard MCQ score" was 21.3%. The cMCQ placed students in a situation closer to practice reality than standard MCQ. In addition to its usefulness as an assessment tool, those tests had a formative value and allowed students to work on their ability to measure their doubt/certainty in order to develop a reflexive approach, required for their future professional practice.

CONCLUSION

cMCQ followed by CBM is a feasible and reliable evaluation method for the assessment of diagnostic testing.

Understanding Clinical Reasoning through Visual Scanpath and Brain Activity Analysis

This paper presents an experimental study that analyzes learners’ visual behaviour and brain activity in clinical reasoning. An acquisition protocol was defined to record eye tracking and EEG data from 15 participants as they interact with a computer-based learning environment called Amnesia, a medical simulation system that assesses the analytical skills of novice medicine students while they solve patient cases. We use gaze data to assess learners’ visual focus and present our methodology to track learners’ reasoning process through scanpath pattern analysis. We also describe our methodology for examining learners’ cognitive states using mental engagement and workload neural indexes. Finally, we discuss the relationship between gaze path information and EEG and how our analyses can lead to new forms of clinical diagnostic reasoning assessment.

Diagnostic Accuracy of Suspected Appendicitis: A Comparative Analysis of Misdiagnosed Appendicitis in Children

OBJECTIVE

When evaluating suspected appendicitis, limited data support quality benchmarks for negative appendectomy (NA); none exist for delayed diagnosis of appendicitis (DDA). The objectives of this study are the following: (1) to provide preliminary evidence supporting a quality benchmark for DDA and 2) to compare presenting features and diagnostic evaluations of children with NA and DDA with those with pathology-confirmed appendicitis (PCA) diagnosed during initial emergency department (ED) encounter.

METHODS

Secondary analysis of data from a QI project designed to reduce the use computed tomography when evaluating suspected appendicitis using a case-control design. Patients undergoing appendectomy in an academic tertiary care children's hospital system between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2016 (n = 1,189) were eligible for inclusion in this case-control study. Negative appendectomy was defined as no pathologic change or findings consistent with a different diagnosis. Delayed diagnosis of appendicitis was defined as patients undergoing appendectomy within 7 days of a prior ED visit for a related complaint. Controls of PCA (n = 150) were randomly selected from all cases undergoing appendectomy.

RESULTS

There were 42 NA (3.5%) and 31 DDA (2.6%). Cases of PCA and NA exhibited similar histories, examination findings, and underwent comparable diagnostic evaluations. Cases of PCA more frequently demonstrated a white blood cell count greater than 10 × 103/μL (85% vs 67%; P = 0.01), a left-shift (77% vs 45%; P < 0.001), and an ultrasound interpretation with high probability for appendicitis (73% vs 54%; P = 0.03). Numerous significant differences in history, examination findings, and diagnostic tests performed existed between cases of PCA and DDA.

CONCLUSIONS

Children with PCA and NA present similarly and undergo comparable evaluations resulting in appendectomy. A 3% to 4% NA rate may be unavoidable given these similarities. Presenting features in DDA significantly differ from those of PCA. An irreducible proportion of appendicitis diagnoses may be delayed.

Étude exploratoire de l’utilisation des cartes conceptuelles pour le développement du raisonnement clinique des étudiants de deuxième cycle en stage dans un service d’urgence

Objectif : Par la grande diversité de situations rencontrées, les services d’urgence offrent aux étudiants en médecine une opportunité d’enrichir leur répertoire expérientiel. Les cartes conceptuelles, en impliquant activement les étudiants dans une démarche de résolution de problème, pourraient favoriser le développement de leur raisonnement clinique. Cette étude vise à mieux comprendre l’utilisation des cartes conceptuelles par des étudiants en médecine en stage dans un service d’urgence et leur potentielle aide sur le développement du raisonnement clinique.

Matériel et méthode : Étude exploratoire qualitative fondée sur des groupes de discussion menés auprès d’étudiants volontaires pour utiliser des cartes conceptuelles durant leur stage dans le service d’urgence.

Résultats : Onze étudiants ont participé. Les principaux obstacles étaient le peu de temps et le nombre trop élevé de patients ; selon eux, les cartes conceptuelles permettaient de mieux mémoriser et d’enrichir leur répertoire de situations rencontrées. Sans supervision, les cartes conceptuelles ont surtout été utilisées comme outil de synthèse et à des fins diagnostiques.

Conclusion : Les résultats de cette approche qualitative suggèrent que l’utilisation de cartes conceptuelles dans un service d’urgence devrait se faire sous condition d’une formation préalable pour les étudiants ainsi que de l’allocation d’un temps dédié pour leur réalisation. Même sans supervision, l’utilisation de cartes conceptuelles pourrait favoriser la mémoire expérientielle et la phase de catégorisation du raisonnement clinique. Une utilisation supervisée qui permettrait de faciliter la construction des cartes et de développer toutes les phases du raisonnement clinique paraît souhaitable. Ces hypothèses pourraient faire l’objet d’une vérification par une approche quantitative à plus grande échelle.

Educators and practitioners' perspectives in the development of a learning by concordance tool for medical clerkship in the context of the COVID pandemic

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has forced medical schools to create educational material to palliate the anticipated and observed decrease in clinical experiences during clerkships. An online learning by concordance (LbC) tool was developed to overcome the limitation of students' experiences with clinical cases. However, knowledge about the instructional design of an LbC tool is scarce, especially the perspectives of collaborators involved in its design: 1- educators who wrote the vignettes' questions and 2- practitioners who constitute the reference panel by answering the LbC questions. The aim of this study was to describe the key elements that supported the pedagogical design of an LbC tool from the perspectives of educators and practitioners.

METHODS

A descriptive qualitative research design has been used. Online questionnaires were used, and descriptive analysis was conducted.

RESULTS

Six educators and 19 practitioners participated in the study. Important to the educators in designing the LbC tool were prevalent or high-stake situations, theoretical knowledge, professional situations experienced and perceived difficulties among students, and that the previous workshop promoted peer discussion and helped solidify the writing process. Important for practitioners was standards of practice and consensus among experts. However, they were uncertain of the educational value of their feedback, considering the ambiguity of the situations included in the LbC tool.

CONCLUSIONS

The LbC tool is a relatively new training tool in medical education. Further research is needed to refine our understanding of the design of such a tool and ensure its content validity to meet the pedagogical objectives of the clerkship.

Script concordance tests: A call for action in dental education

The Script Concordance Test (SCT) is an educational tool that aims to assess the ability to interpret medical information under conditions of uncertainty. It is widely used and validated in health education, but almost unknown in dentistry. Based on authentic clinical problem-solving situations, it allows to assess clinical reasoning that experienced health workers develop over the years. A specific scoring system, dedicated to SCT, considers the variability of responses of practitioners in the same clinical situations. Finally, the scores generated by SCT reflect the respondents' ability to interpret clinical data compared to experienced clinicians. This article aims to familiarise the dental educators' community with SCT construction, optimisation and its possible applications.

Multimorbidity and clinical reasoning through the eyes of GPs: a qualitative study

Objectives

Despite the high prevalence of patients suffering from multimorbidity, the clinical reasoning processes involved during the longitudinal management are still sparse.

This study aimed to investigate what are the different characteristics of the clinical reasoning process clinicians use with patients suffering from multimorbidity, and to what extent this clinical reasoning differs from diagnostic reasoning.

Design

Given the exploratory nature of this study and the difficulty general practitioners (GPs) have in expressing their reasoning, a qualitative methodology was therefore, chosen. The Clinical reasoning Model described by Charlin et al was used as a framework to describe the multifaceted processes of the clinical reasoning.

Setting

Semistructured interviews were conducted with nine GPs working in an ambulatory setting in June to September 2018, in Geneva, Switzerland.

Participants

Participants were GPs who came from public hospital or private practice. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and a thematic analysis was conducted.

Results

The results highlighted how some cognitive processes seem to be more specific to the management reasoning.

Thus, the main goal is not to reach a diagnosis, but rather to consider several possibilities in order to maintain a balance between the evidence-based care options, patient’s priorities and maintaining quality of life. The initial representation of the current problem seems to be more related to the importance of establishing links between the different pre-existing diseases, identifying opportunities for actions and trying to integrate the new elements from the patient’s context, rather than identifying the signs and symptoms that can lead to generating new clinical hypotheses. The multiplicity of options to resolve problems is often perceived as difficult by GPs. Furthermore, longitudinal management does not allow them to achieve a final resolution of problems and that requires continuous review and an ongoing prioritisation process.

Conclusion

This study contributes to a better understanding of the clinical reasoning processes of GPs in the longitudinal management of patients suffering from multimorbidity. Through a practical and accessible model, this qualitative study offers new perspectives for identifying the components of management reasoning. These results open the path to new research projects.

Trends and challenges of medical education

The aim of this article is to reflect on the contextual factors that influence medical education, in order to provide some recommendations about the challenges that physicians face. A literature review was conducted to write this reflection paper, and it was found that the education of health professionals has undergone significant changes that are based on the development of biomedical sciences, technology, and pedagogy, and are influenced by the needs of the general population, the requirements of the health systems of each country, and scientific progress. These changes have given rise to challenges inherent to the special characteristics of each country and related to the quantity, quality, and relevance of the training of physicians. In this regard, it has been suggested that, in the face of such changes, it is necessary to design curricula that integrate all aspects of health care, consider the supply and demand of medical services, emphasize professionalism, take into account the pedagogical training of health sciences teachers, comply with quality standards, assist students in selecting undergraduate programs adequately (in this case Medicine), and ensure relevant clinical practice scenarios. It should also be noted that medical education has not adapted adequately to the aforementioned changes in many countries and, therefore, the development of teaching and learning strategies has lagged behind and physicians in such countries do not have the capacity to provide the health care required by the general population in a proper manner.

Understanding the clinical reasoning processes involved in the management of multimorbidity in an ambulatory setting: study protocol of a stimulated recall research

BACKGROUND

Primary care physicians are at the very heart of managing patients suffering from multimorbidity. However, several studies have highlighted that some physicians feel ill-equipped to manage these kinds of complex clinical situations. Few studies are available on the clinical reasoning processes at play during the long-term management and follow-up of patients suffering from multimorbidity. This study aims to contribute to a better understanding on how the clinical reasoning of primary care physicians is affected during follow-up consultations with these patients.

METHODS

A qualitative research project based on semi-structured interviews with primary care physicians in an ambulatory setting will be carried out, using the video stimulated recall interview method. Participants will be filmed in their work environment during a standard consultation with a patient suffering from multimorbidity using a "button camera" (small camera) which will be pinned to their white coat. The recording will be used in a following semi-structured interview with physicians and the research team to instigate a stimulated recall. Stimulated recall is a research method that allows the investigation of cognitive processes by inviting participants to recall their concurrent thinking during an event when prompted by a video sequence recall. During this interview, participants will be prompted by different video sequence and asked to discuss them; the aim will be to encourage them to make their clinical reasoning processes explicit. Fifteen to twenty interviews are planned to reach data saturation. The interviews will be transcribed verbatim and data will be analysed according to a standard content analysis, using deductive and inductive approaches.

CONCLUSION

Study results will contribute to the scientific community's overall understanding of clinical reasoning. This will subsequently allow future generation of primary care physicians to have access to more adequate trainings to manage patients suffering from multimorbidity in their practice. As a result, this will improve the quality of the patient's care and treatments.

Diagnostic Activities and Diagnostic Practices in Medical Education and Teacher Education: An Interdisciplinary Comparison

In this article, we investigate diagnostic activities and diagnostic practices in medical education and teacher education. Previous studies have tended to focus on comparing knowledge between disciplines, but such an approach is complicated due to the content specificity of knowledge. We compared 142 learners from medical education and 122 learners from teacher education who were asked to (a) diagnose eight simulated cases from their respective discipline in a simulation-based learning environment and (b) write a justificatory report for each simulated case. We coded all justificatory reports regarding four diagnostic activities: generating hypotheses, generating evidence, evaluating evidence, and drawing conclusions. Moreover, using the method of Epistemic Network Analysis, we operationalized diagnostic practices as the relative frequencies of co-occurring diagnostic activities. We found significant differences between learners from medical education and teacher education with respect to both their diagnostic activities and diagnostic practices. Learners from medical education put relatively more emphasis on generating hypotheses and drawing conclusions, therefore applying a more hypothesis-driven approach. By contrast, learners in teacher education had a stronger focus on generating and evaluating evidence, indicating a more data-driven approach. The results may be explained by different epistemic ideals and standards taught in higher education. Further research on the issue of epistemic ideals and standards in diagnosing is needed. Moreover, we recommend that educators think beyond individuals' knowledge and implement measures to systematically teach and increase the awareness of disciplinary standards.

Assessing validity evidence for a serious game dedicated to patient clinical deterioration and communication

Background

A serious game (SG) is a useful tool for nurse training. The objectives of this study were to assess validity evidence of a new SG designed to improve nurses’ ability to detect patient clinical deterioration.

Methods

The SG (LabForGames Warning) was developed through interaction between clinical and pedagogical experts and one developer. For the game study, consenting nurses were divided into three groups: nursing students (pre-graduate) (group S), recently graduated nurses (graduated < 2 years before the study) (group R) and expert nurses (graduated > 4 years before the study and working in an ICU) (group E). Each volunteer played three cases of the game (haemorrhage, brain trauma and obstructed intestinal tract). The validity evidence was assessed following Messick’s framework: content, response process (questionnaire, observational analysis), internal structure, relations to other variables (by scoring each case and measuring playing time) and consequences (a posteriori analysis).

Results

The content validity was supported by the game design produced by clinical, pedagogical and interprofessional experts in accordance with the French nurse training curriculum, literature review and pilot testing. Seventy-one nurses participated in the study: S (n = 25), R (n = 25) and E (n = 21). The content validity in all three cases was highly valued by group E. The response process evidence was supported by good security control. There was no significant difference in the three groups’ high rating of the game’s realism, satisfaction and educational value. All participants stated that their knowledge of the different steps of the clinical reasoning process had improved. Regarding the internal structure, the factor analysis showed a common source of variance between the steps of the clinical reasoning process and communication or the situational awareness errors made predominantly by students. No statistical difference was observed between groups regarding scores and playing time. A posteriori analysis of the results of final examinations assessing study-related topics found no significant difference between group S participants and students who did not participate in the study.

Conclusion

While it appears that this SG cannot be used for summative assessment (score validity undemonstrated), it is positively valued as an educational tool.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT03092440

Sequence matters: patterns in task-based clinical reasoning

Background

The cognitive pathways that lead to an accurate diagnosis and efficient management plan can touch on various clinical reasoning tasks (1). These tasks can be employed at any point during the clinical reasoning process and though the four distinct categories of framing, diagnosis, management, and reflection provide some insight into how these tasks map onto clinical reasoning, much is still unknown about the task-based clinical reasoning process. For example, when and how are these tasks typically used? And more importantly, do these clinical reasoning task processes evolve when patient encounters become complex and/or challenging (i.e. with contextual factors)?

Methods

We examine these questions through the lens of situated cognition, context specificity, and cognitive load theory. Sixty think-aloud transcripts from 30 physicians who participated in two separate cases – one with a contextual factor and one without – were coded for 26 clinical reasoning tasks (1). These tasks were organized temporally, i.e. when they emerged in their think-aloud process. Frequencies of each of the 26 tasks were aggregated, categorized, and visualized in order to analyze task category sequences.

Results

We found that (a) as expected, clinical tasks follow a general sequence, (b) contextual factors can distort this emerging sequence, and (c) the presence of contextual factors prompts more experienced physicians to clinically reason similar to that of less experienced physicians.

Conclusions

These findings add to the existing literature on context specificity in clinical reasoning and can be used to strengthen teaching and assessment of clinical reasoning.

A Scoping Review of Physicians' Clinical Reasoning in Emergency Departments

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Clinical reasoning is considered a core competency of physicians. Yet there is a paucity of research on clinical reasoning specifically in emergency medicine, as highlighted in the literature.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review to examine the state of research on clinical reasoning in this specialty. Our team, composed of content and methodological experts, identified 3,763 articles in the literature, 95 of which were included.

RESULTS

Most studies were published after 2000. Few studies focused on the cognitive processes involved in decisionmaking (ie, clinical reasoning). Of these, many confirmed findings from the general literature on clinical reasoning; specifically, the role of both intuitive and analytic processes. We categorized factors that influence decisionmaking into contextual, patient, and physician factors. Many studies focused on decisions in regard to investigations and admission. Test ordering is influenced by physicians' experience, fear of litigation, and concerns about malpractice. Fear of litigation and malpractice also increases physicians' propensity to admit patients. Context influences reasoning but findings pertaining to specific factors, such as patient flow and workload, were inconsistent.

CONCLUSION

Many studies used designs such as descriptive or correlational methods, limiting the strength of findings. Many gray areas persist, in which studies are either scarce or yield conflicting results. The findings of this scoping review should encourage us to intensify research in the field of emergency physicians' clinical reasoning, particularly on the cognitive processes at play and the factors influencing them, using appropriate theoretical frameworks and more robust methods.

Clinical Reasoning in Physical Therapy: A Concept Analysis

BACKGROUND

Physical therapy, along with most health professions, struggles to describe clinical reasoning, despite it being a vital skill in effective patient care. This lack of a unified conceptualization of clinical reasoning leads to variable and inconsistent teaching, assessment, and research.

OBJECTIVE

The objective was to conceptualize a broad description of physical therapists' clinical reasoning grounded in the published literature and to unify understanding for future work related to teaching, assessment, and research.

DESIGN/METHODS

The design included a systematic concept analysis using Rodgers' evolutionary methodology. A concept analysis is a research methodology in which a concept's characteristics and the relation between features of the concept are clarified.

RESULTS

Based on findings in the literature, clinical reasoning in physical therapy was conceptualized as integrating cognitive, psychomotor, and affective skills. It is contextual in nature and involves both therapist and client perspectives. It is adaptive, iterative, and collaborative with the intended outcome being a biopsychosocial approach to patient/client management.

LIMITATIONS

Although a comprehensive approach was intended, it is possible that the search methods or reduction of the literature were incomplete or key sources were mistakenly excluded.

CONCLUSIONS

A description of clinical reasoning in physical therapy was conceptualized, as it currently exists in representative literature. The intent is for it to contribute to the unification of an understanding of how clinical reasoning has been conceptualized to date by practitioners, academicians, and clinical educators. Substantial work remains to further develop the concept of clinical reasoning for physical therapy, including the role of movement in our reasoning in practice.

Identifying developmental features in students' clinical reasoning to inform teaching

BACKGROUND

There is increasing evidence that students at different levels of training may benefit from different methods of learning clinical reasoning. Two of the common methods of teaching are the "whole - case" format and the "serial cue" approach. There is little empirical evidence to guide teachers as to which method to use and when to introduce them.

METHODS

We observed 23 students from different stages of training to examine how they were taking a history and how they were thinking whilst doing this. Each student interviewed a simulated patient who presented with a straightforward and a complex presentation. We inferred how students were reasoning from how they took a history and how they described their thinking while doing this.

RESULTS

Early in their training students can only take a generic history. Only later in training are they able to take a focused history, remember the information they have gathered, use it to seek further specific information, compare and contrast possibilities and analyze their data as they are collecting it.

CONCLUSIONS

Early in their training students are unable to analyze data during history taking. When they have started developing illness scripts, they are able to benefit from the "serial cue" approach of teaching clinical reasoning.

Systematizing Professional Knowledge of Medical Doctors and Teachers: Development of an Interdisciplinary Framework in the Context of Diagnostic Competences

Professional knowledge is highlighted as an important prerequisite of both medical doctors and teachers. Based on recent conceptions of professional knowledge in these fields, knowledge can be differentiated within several aspects. However, these knowledge aspects are currently conceptualized differently across different domains and projects. Thus, this paper describes recent frameworks for professional knowledge in medical and educational sciences, which are then integrated into an interdisciplinary two-dimensional model of professional knowledge that can help to align terminology in both domains and compare research results. The models’ two dimensions differentiate between cognitive types of knowledge and content-related knowledge facets and introduces a terminology for all emerging knowledge aspects. The models’ applicability for medical and educational sciences is demonstrated in the context of diagnosis by describing prototypical diagnostic settings for medical doctors as well as for teachers, which illustrate how the framework can be applied and operationalized in these areas. Subsequently, the role of the different knowledge aspects for acting and the possibility of transfer between different content areas are discussed. In conclusion, a possible extension of the model along a “third dimension” that focuses on the effects of growing expertise on professional knowledge over time is proposed and issues for further research are outlined.

Uncovering the relation between clinical reasoning and diagnostic accuracy - An analysis of learner's clinical reasoning processes in virtual patients

BACKGROUND

Clinical reasoning is an important topic in healthcare training, assessment, and research. Virtual patients (VPs) are a safe environment to teach, assess and perform research on clinical reasoning and diagnostic accuracy. Our aim was to explore the details of the clinical reasoning process and diagnostic accuracy of undergraduate medical students when working with VPs using a concept mapping tool.

METHODS

Over seven months we provided access to 67 German and 30 English VPs combined with a concept mapping tool to visualize and measure the clinical reasoning process of identifying problems, differential diagnoses, recommended tests and treatment options, and composing a summary statement about a VP. A final diagnosis had to be submitted by the learners in order to conclude the VP scenario. Learners were allowed multiple attempts or could request the correct diagnosis from the system.

RESULTS

We analyzed 1,393 completed concept maps from 317 learners. We found significant differences between maps with a correct final diagnosis on one or multiple attempts and maps in which learners gave up and requested the solution from the system. These maps had lower scores, fewer summary statements, and fewer problems, differential diagnoses, tests, and treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

The different use patterns and scores between learners who had the correct final diagnosis on one or multiple attempts and those who gave up, indicate that diagnostic accuracy in the form of a correct final diagnosis on the first attempt has to be reconsidered as a sole indicator for clinical reasoning competency. For the training, assessment, and research of clinical reasoning we suggest focusing more on the details of the process to reach a correct diagnosis, rather than whether it was made in the first attempt.

How case representations of medical students change during case processing - Results of a qualitative study

Objective: Representations are mental summaries of a clinical case and help in understanding a clinical problem. However, it is still largely unknown which clinical information medical students include in their case representations. In this study, therefore, the structure and quality of students' case representations were examined to better understand the diagnostic process and its relationship to diagnostic accuracy. What information do medical students include in their representations and is there an association between this information and the diagnostic accuracy? Method: 43 medical students in the fourth and fifth clinical year worked on four clinical cases. During the diagnostic process, they were asked three times per case to write a case representation. 516 representations were qualitatively evaluated using a content-based coding scheme. An analysis was made of the nature and composition of the clinical information. In addition, the association between the general representation structure and the correct case solution was examined. Results: At the beginning, students include most of the clinical information in their representation (66%), but as the case progresses, they begin to select the information offered (2nd representation 42%, 3rd representation 38%). The length of the representation (number of words) does not correlate with the correct case solution (r=-0.08-0.31). The representations do not depend on the case difficulty but have a significant individual component: the representations written by a student are formally very similar in all four cases (r=0.60-0.86). Conclusion: Medical students can select the relevant clinical information and include it in their case representations. Lack of representation does not seem to be a reason for misdiagnosis; Students' deficits in diagnosis are more likely due to knowledge gaps.

Analysis of midwifery teachers' approach to identifying student midwives with poor clinical reasoning skills

OBJECTIVE

To analyse midwifery teachers' pedagogic approaches to remediation for student midwives with poor clinical reasoning skills.

METHODS

A mixed-methods approach using a questionnaire and in-depth interviews.

SETTING

Midwifery schools in France.

PARTICIPANTS

Teachers in French midwifery schools.

MEASUREMENTS AND FINDINGS

A quarter of the teachers had no training in clinical reasoning. Midwifery teachers mainly identified students' clinical reasoning difficulties during clinical supervision with a non-validated tool. All teachers detected the warning signs and the main obstacles identifying student midwives with poor clinical reasoning skills along with some identifying factors favouring those difficulties. However, the remedial strategies proposed were mainly reassessment without personalised corrective learning activities.

KEY CONCLUSIONS

The approach to identifying student midwives with poor clinical reasoning skills was incomplete and remedial strategies were stereotypical.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Midwifery teachers should be trained to recognise their students' clinical reasoning issues to identify them early, using all types of learning activities. Remedial strategies should be implemented promptly, adapted to each student and foster the transfer of learning.

Advancing clinical reasoning in virtual patients - development and application of a conceptual framework

Background: Clinical reasoning is a complex skill students have to acquire during their education. For educators it is difficult to explain their reasoning to students, because it is partly an automatic and unconscious process. Virtual Patients (VPs) are used to support the acquisition of clinical reasoning skills in healthcare education. However, until now it remains unclear which features or settings of VPs optimally foster clinical reasoning. Therefore, our aims were to identify key concepts of the clinical reasoning process in a qualitative approach and draw conclusions on how each concept can be enhanced to advance the learning of clinical reasoning with virtual patients. Methods: We chose a grounded theory approach to identify key categories and concepts of learning clinical reasoning and develop a framework. Throughout this process, the emerging codes were discussed with a panel of interdisciplinary experts. In a second step we applied the framework to virtual patients. Results: Based on the data we identified the core category as the "multifactorial nature of learning clinical reasoning". This category is reflected in the following five main categories: Psychological Theories, Patient-centeredness, Context, Learner-centeredness, and Teaching/Assessment. Each category encompasses between four and six related concepts. Conclusions: With our approach we were able to elaborate how key categories and concepts of clinical reasoning can be applied to virtual patients. This includes aspects such as allowing learners to access a large number of VPs with adaptable levels of complexity and feedback or emphasizing dual processing, errors, and uncertainty.

A Clinical Reasoning Tool for Virtual Patients: Design-Based Research Study

BACKGROUND

Clinical reasoning is a fundamental process medical students have to learn during and after medical school. Virtual patients (VP) are a technology-enhanced learning method to teach clinical reasoning. However, VP systems do not exploit their full potential concerning the clinical reasoning process; for example, most systems focus on the outcome and less on the process of clinical reasoning.

OBJECTIVES

Keeping our concept grounded in a former qualitative study, we aimed to design and implement a tool to enhance VPs with activities and feedback, which specifically foster the acquisition of clinical reasoning skills.

METHODS

We designed the tool by translating elements of a conceptual clinical reasoning learning framework into software requirements. The resulting clinical reasoning tool enables learners to build their patient's illness script as a concept map when they are working on a VP scenario. The student's map is compared with the experts' reasoning at each stage of the VP, which is technically enabled by using Medical Subject Headings, which is a comprehensive controlled vocabulary published by the US National Library of Medicine. The tool is implemented using Web technologies, has an open architecture that enables its integration into various systems through an open application program interface, and is available under a Massachusetts Institute of Technology license.

RESULTS

We conducted usability tests following a think-aloud protocol and a pilot field study with maps created by 64 medical students. The results show that learners interact with the tool but create less nodes and connections in the concept map than an expert. Further research and usability tests are required to analyze the reasons.

CONCLUSIONS

The presented tool is a versatile, systematically developed software component that specifically supports the clinical reasoning skills acquisition. It can be plugged into VP systems or used as stand-alone software in other teaching scenarios. The modular design allows an extension with new feedback mechanisms and learning analytics algorithms.

Representation scaffolds improve diagnostic efficiency in medical students

CONTEXT

Diagnostic efficiency is important in daily clinical practice as doctors have to face problems within a limited time frame. To foster the clinical reasoning of students is a major challenge in medical education research. Little is known about students' diagnostic efficiency. On the basis of current theories, scaffolds for case representation (statement of the case as far as it is summarised in the mind) could be a promising approach to make the diagnostic reasoning of intermediate medical students more efficient.

METHODS

Clinical case processing of 88 medical students in their fourth and fifth years was analysed in a randomised, controlled laboratory study. Cases dealing with dyspnoea were provided in an electronic learning environment (CASUS). Students could freely choose the time, amount and sequence of clinical information. During the learning phase the intervention group was asked to write down case representation summaries while working on the cases. In the assessment phase diagnostic efficiency was operationalised as the number of correct diagnoses divided by the time spent on diagnosing.

RESULTS

Diagnostic efficiency was significantly improved by the representation scaffolding (M = 0.12 [SD = 0.07], M = 0.09 [SD = 0.06] correct cases/time, p = 0.045), whereas accuracy remained unchanged (M = 2.28 [SD = 1.10], M = 2.09 [SD = 1.08], p = 0.52). Both groups screened the same amount of clinical information, but the scaffolding group did this faster (M = 20.8 minutes [SD = 7.15], M = 24.6 minutes [SD = 7.42], p = 0.01; Cohen's d = 0.5).

CONCLUSION

Diagnostic efficiency is an important outcome variable in clinical reasoning research as it corresponds to workplace challenges. Scaffolding for case representations significantly improved the diagnostic efficiency of fourth and fifth-year medical students, most likely because of a more targeted screening of the available information.

A Novel Approach to Study Medical Decision Making in the Clinical Setting: The "Own-point-of-view" Perspective

BACKGROUND

Making diagnostic and therapeutic decisions is a critical activity among physicians. It relies on the ability of physicians to use cognitive processes and specific knowledge in the context of a clinical reasoning. This ability is a core competency in physicians, especially in the field of emergency medicine where the rate of diagnostic errors is high. Studies that explore medical decision making in an authentic setting are increasing significantly. They are based on the use of qualitative methods that are applied at two separate times: 1) a video recording of the subject's actual activity in an authentic setting and 2) an interview with the subject, supported by the video recording. Traditionally, activity is recorded from an "external perspective"; i.e., a camera is positioned in the room in which the consultation takes place. This approach has many limits, both technical and with respect to the validity of the data collected.

OBJECTIVES

The article aims at 1) describing how decision making is currently being studied, especially from a qualitative standpoint, and the reasons why new methods are needed, and 2) reporting how we used an original, innovative approach to study decision making in the field of emergency medicine and findings from these studies to guide further the use of this method. The method consists in recording the subject's activity from his own point of view, by fixing a microcamera on his temple or the branch of his glasses. An interview is then held on the basis of this recording, so that the subject being interviewed can relive the situation, to facilitate the explanation of his reasoning with respect to his decisions and actions.

RESULTS

We describe how this method has been used successfully in investigating medical decision making in emergency medicine. We provide details on how to use it optimally, taking into account the constraints associated with the practice of emergency medicine and the benefits in the study of clinical reasoning.

CONCLUSION

The "own-point-of-view" video technique is a promising method to study clinical decision making in emergency medicine. It is a powerful tool to stimulate recall and help physicians make their reasoning explicit, thanks to a greater psychological immersion.

Development and validation of a computer-based situational judgement test to assess medical students' communication skills in the field of shared decision making

OBJECTIVE

To develop a computer-based test (CBT) measuring medical students' communication skills in the field of shared decision making (SDM) and to evaluate its construct validity.

METHODS

The CBT was developed in the context of an experimental study comparing three different trainings for SDM (including e-learning and/or role-play) and a control group. Assessment included a CBT (Part A: seven context-poor questions, Part B: 15 context-rich questions) and interviews with two simulated patients (SP-assessment). Cronbach's α was used to test the internal consistency. Correlations between CBT and SP-assessment were used to further evaluate construct validity of the CBT.

RESULTS

Seventy-two students took part in the study. Mean value for the CBT score was 72% of the total score. Cronbach's α was 0.582. After eliminating three items, Cronbach's α increased to 0.625. Correlations between the CBT and SP-assessment were low to moderate. The control group scored significantly lower than the training settings (p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

The CBT was reliable enough to test for group differences. For summative assessment purposes, considerably more questions would be needed.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

We encourage teachers who particularly work with large student numbers to consider CBT as a feasible assessment method for cognitive aspects of communication skills.

In Brief: Validity of Case Summaries in Written Examinations of Clinical Reasoning

Construct: The purpose of this study was to provide initial evidence of the validity of written case summaries as assessments of clinical problem representation in a classroom setting.

BACKGROUND

To solve clinical problems, clinicians must gain a clear representation of the issues. In the clinical setting, oral case presentations-or summaries-are used to assess learners' ability to gather, synthesize, and "translate" pertinent case information. This ability can be assessed in Objective Structured Clinical Examination and Virtual Patient settings using oral or written case summaries. Evidence of their validity in these settings includes adequate interrater agreement and moderate correlation with other assessments of clinical reasoning. We examined the use of written case summaries in a classroom setting as part of an examination designed to assess clinical reasoning.

APPROACH

We developed and implemented written examinations for 2 preclerkship general practice courses in Years 4 and 5 of a 7-year curriculum. Examinations included 8 case summary questions in Year 4 and 5 in Year 5. Seven hundred students participated. Cases were scored using 3 criteria: extraction of pertinent findings, semantic quality, and global ratings. We examined the item parameters (using classical test theory) and generalizability of case summary items. We computed correlations between case summary scores and scores on other questions within the examination.

RESULTS

Item parameters were acceptable (average item difficulty = 0.49-0.73 and 0.59-0.68 in Years 4 and 5; average point-biserials = 0.21-0.24 and 0.18-0.21). Scores were moderately generalizable (G coefficients = 0.40-0.50), with case-specificity a substantial source of measurement error (10.2%-19.5% of variance). Scoring and rater had small effects. Correlations with related constructs were low to moderate.

CONCLUSIONS

There is good evidence regarding the scoring and generalizability of written case summaries for assessment of clinical problem representation. Further evidence regarding the extrapolation and implications of these assessments is warranted.

Development of clinical reasoning in an undergraduate medical program at a Brazilian university

CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE The cognitive processes relating to the development of clinical reasoning are only partially understood, which explains the difficulties in teaching this skill in medical courses. This study aimed to understand how clinical reasoning develops among undergraduate medical students. DESIGN AND SETTING Quantitative and qualitative exploratory descriptive study conducted at the medical school of Universidade Federal de Goiás. METHODS The focus group technique was used among 40 students who participated in five focus groups, with eight students from each year, from the first to fifth year of the medical school program. The material was subjected to content analysis in categories, and was subsequently quantified and subjected to descriptive statistical analysis and chi-square test for inferential statistics. RESULTS The content of the students' statements was divided into two categories: clinical reasoning - in the preclinical phase, clinical reasoning was based on knowledge of basic medical science and in the clinical phase, there was a change to pattern recognition; knowledge of basic medical science - 80.6% of the students recognized its use, but they stated that they only used it in difficult cases. CONCLUSION In the preclinical phase, in a medical school with a traditional curriculum, clinical reasoning depends on the knowledge acquired from basic medical science, while in the clinical phase, it becomes based on pattern recognition.

Collaboration Expertise in Medicine - No Evidence for Cross-Domain Application from a Memory Retrieval Study

Background

Is there evidence for expertise on collaboration and, if so, is there evidence for cross-domain application? Recall of stimuli was used to measure so-called internal collaboration scripts of novices and experts in two studies. Internal collaboration scripts refer to an individual’s knowledge about how to interact with others in a social situation.

Method—Study 1

Ten collaboration experts and ten novices of the content domain social science were presented with four pictures of people involved in collaborative activities. The recall texts were coded, distinguishing between superficial and collaboration script information.

Results—Study 1

Experts recalled significantly more collaboration script information (M = 25.20; SD = 5.88) than did novices (M = 13.80; SD = 4.47). Differences in superficial information were not found.

Study 2

Study 2 tested whether the differences found in Study 1 could be replicated. Furthermore, the cross-domain application of internal collaboration scripts was explored.

Method—Study 2

Twenty collaboration experts and 20 novices of the content domain medicine were presented with four pictures and four videos of their content domain and a video and picture of another content domain. All stimuli showed collaborative activities typical for the respective content domains.

Results—Study 2

As in Study 1, experts recalled significantly more collaboration script information of their content domain (M = 71.65; SD = 33.23) than did novices (M = 54.25; SD = 15.01). For the novices, no differences were found for the superficial information nor for the retrieval of collaboration script information recalled after the other content domain stimuli.

Discussion

There is evidence for expertise on collaboration in memory tasks. The results show that experts hold substantially more collaboration script information than did novices. Furthermore, the differences between collaboration novices and collaboration experts occurred only in their own content domain, indicating that internal collaboration scripts are not easily stored and retrieved in memory tasks other than in the own content domain.

Assessing clinical reasoning (ASCLIRE): Instrument development and validation

Clinical reasoning is an essential competency in medical education. This study aimed at developing and validating a test to assess diagnostic accuracy, collected information, and diagnostic decision time in clinical reasoning. A norm-referenced computer-based test for the assessment of clinical reasoning (ASCLIRE) was developed, integrating the entire clinical decision process. In a cross-sectional study participants were asked to choose as many diagnostic measures as they deemed necessary to diagnose the underlying disease of six different cases with acute or sub-acute dyspnea and provide a diagnosis. 283 students and 20 content experts participated. In addition to diagnostic accuracy, respective decision time and number of used relevant diagnostic measures were documented as distinct performance indicators. The empirical structure of the test was investigated using a structural equation modeling approach. Experts showed higher accuracy rates and lower decision times than students. In a cross-sectional comparison, the diagnostic accuracy of students improved with the year of study. Wrong diagnoses provided by our sample were comparable to wrong diagnoses in practice. We found an excellent fit for a model with three latent factors-diagnostic accuracy, decision time, and choice of relevant diagnostic information-with diagnostic accuracy showing no significant correlation with decision time. ASCLIRE considers decision time as an important performance indicator beneath diagnostic accuracy and provides evidence that clinical reasoning is a complex ability comprising diagnostic accuracy, decision time, and choice of relevant diagnostic information as three partly correlated but still distinct aspects.

Enhancing diagnostic competence with self-explanation prompts and adaptable feedback

CONTEXT

The fostering of diagnostic competence is an important goal of medical education. Worked-example cases with integrated errors represent a promising method of doing so.

OBJECTIVES

This study investigates whether the provision of self-explanation prompts and adaptable feedback fosters diagnostic competence in a computer-supported learning environment based on worked-example cases with integrated errors.

METHODS

A total of 103 medical students participated in the study. After a test of prior diagnostic competence, learners studied worked examples with integrated errors for cases of heart failure of different causes in a computer-based learning environment. The worked examples started with the description of a clinical situation in which a student apprentice diagnoses a patient and commits errors in the conclusions he draws from the information presented. Participants were randomly assigned to four learning conditions that varied in two factors: self-explanation prompts and adaptable feedback. In the self-explanation prompts condition, students were prompted to reflect on the errors. Independently of the condition, the student apprentice in the worked example receives feedback on his diagnosis. In the adaptable feedback condition, students were able to adjust the level of elaboration of the feedback. A post-test of diagnostic competence was administered.

RESULTS

Adaptable feedback had a positive effect on important aspects of diagnostic competence (strategic knowledge: F(1,93)  = 4.15, p < 0.05, partial η(2)  = 0.04; decision-oriented practical knowledge: F(1,93)  = 4.41, p < 0.05, partial η(2)  = 0.05), whereas self-explanation prompts did not further improve the effectiveness of the learning environment.

CONCLUSIONS

In the use of worked examples with integrated errors, the provision of adaptable feedback whereby learners have control over the amount of feedback they receive seems to be advantageous to the development of important decision-oriented aspects of diagnostic competence. Additional help to stimulate reflection about the error by self-explanation prompts does not seem to be critical.