Dataset Information

Clinical reasoning for acute dyspnoea: comparison between final-year medical students from discipline- and competency-based undergraduate programmes.

ABSTRACT: Clinical reasoning for acute dyspnoea: Comparison of final-year medical students from discipline- and competency-based undergraduate programmes. BACKGROUND:The global shift to competency-based medical education aims to improve the performance of its trainees, including in the key competency domain of clinical reasoning. However, research on whether such education actually improves clinical reasoning is sparse. The purpose of this study is to compare assessed clinical reasoning performance in digitally presented cases of acute dyspnoea between final-year medical students from a traditional, discipline-based and those from an integrated, competency-based undergraduate programme. METHODS:A total of 60 medical students in their final-year clerkships participated in the study; 30 were from a discipline-based programme, and 30 were from a competency-based programme of the same faculty. The students completed a knowledge test consisting of 22 single choice items and a computer-based test of clinical reasoning with six video-based case scenarios with different underlying diseases leading to dyspnoea. The operationalized measures of clinical reasoning were the number and relevance of the diagnostic tests chosen, time to diagnosis and diagnostic accuracy. RESULTS:The two groups did not differ in their knowledge of the acute dyspnoea content domain. With regard to clinical reasoning, the selection of relevant tests, time required to make a diagnosis and accuracy of the diagnosis varied across the six case scenarios in both groups. However, the results from the measures of the clinical reasoning process did not differ between the students from the two types of undergraduate medical programmes. No significant differences were found with regard to the selection of relevant diagnostic tests (M?=?63.8% vs. M?=?62.8%), the time to a diagnosis (M?= 128.7?s vs. M?= 136.4?s) or the accuracy of diagnosis (M?=?82.2% vs. M?=?77.0%). CONCLUSIONS:Key indicators of the clinical reasoning process, when assessed with objectively measured parameters, did not differ between final-year medical students from a traditional, discipline-based and those from an integrated, competency-based undergraduate programme in the domain of acute dyspnoea. The results substantiate and expand those of previous studies based on subjective assessor ratings that showed limited change in the clinical reasoning performance of medical students with competency-based undergraduate education.

SUBMITTER: Czeskleba A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7238574 | biostudies-literature | 2020 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Clinical reasoning for acute dyspnoea: comparison between final-year medical students from discipline- and competency-based undergraduate programmes.

Czeskleba Anja A Holzhausen Ylva Y Peters Harm H

BMC medical education 20200519 1

Clinical reasoning for acute dyspnoea: Comparison of final-year medical students from discipline- and competency-based undergraduate programmes.<h4>Background</h4>The global shift to competency-based medical education aims to improve the performance of its trainees, including in the key competency domain of clinical reasoning. However, research on whether such education actually improves clinical reasoning is sparse. The purpose of this study is to compare assessed clinical reasoning performance ...[more]

PMID: 32429955

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionExtracurricular research programmes (ERPs) may contribute to reducing the current shortage in physician-scientists, but usually select students based on grades only. The question arises if students should be selected based on their motivation, regardless of their previous academic performance. Focusing on grades and lacking to take motivation into account when selecting students for ERPs might exclude an important target group when aiming to cultivate future physician-scientists. Therefore, this study compared ERP students with lower and higher previous academic performance on subsequent academic performance, ERP performance, and motivational factors.MethodsProspective cohort study with undergraduate medical students who filled in a yearly questionnaire on motivational factors. Two student groups participating in an ERP were compared: students with first-year grade point average (GPA) ≥7 versus <7 on a 10-point grading scale. Linear and logistic regressions analyses were used to compare groups on subsequent academic performance (i.e. third-year GPA, in-time bachelor completion), ERP performance (i.e. drop-out, number of credits), and motivational factors (i.e. intrinsic motivation for research, research self-efficacy beliefs, perceptions of research, curiosity), while adjusting for gender and motivational factors at baseline.ResultsThe <7 group had significantly lower third-year GPA, and significantly higher odds for ERP drop-out than the ≥7 group. However, there was no significant between-group difference on in-time bachelor completion and the <7 group was not inferior to the ≥7 group in terms of intrinsic motivation for research, perceptions of research, and curiosity.ConclusionsSince intrinsic motivation for research, perceptions of research, and curiosity are prerequisites of future research involvement, it seems beneficial to focus on motivation when selecting students for ERPS, allowing students with lower current academic performance to participate in ERPs as well.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The clinical reasoning process, which requires biomedical knowledge, knowledge about problem-solving strategies, and knowledge about reasons for diagnostic procedures, is a key element of physicians' daily practice but difficult to assess. The aim of this study was to empirically develop a Clinical Reasoning Indicators-History Taking-Scale (CRI-HT-S) and to assess the clinical reasoning ability of advanced medical students during a simulation involving history taking. METHODS:The Clinical Reasoning Indictors-History Taking-Scale (CRI-HT-S) including a 5-point Likert scale for assessment was designed from clinical reasoning indicators identified in a qualitative study in 2017. To assess indicators of clinical reasoning ability, 65 advanced medical students (semester 10, n =?25 versus final year, n =?40) from three medical schools participated in a 360-degree competence assessment in the role of beginning residents during a simulated first workday in hospital. This assessment included a consultation hour with five simulated patients which was videotaped. Videos of 325 patient consultations were assessed using the CRI-HT-S. A factor analysis was conducted and the students' results were compared according to their advancement in undergraduate medical training. RESULTS:The clinical reasoning indicators of the CRI-HT-S loaded on three factors relevant for clinical reasoning: 1) focusing questions, 2) creating context, and 3) securing information. Students reached significantly different scores (p <?.001) for the three factors (factor 1: 4.07?±?.47, factor 2: 3.72?±?.43, factor 3: 2.79?±?.83). Students in semester 10 reached significantly lower scores for factor 3 than students in their final year (p <?.05). CONCLUSIONS:The newly developed CRI-HT-S worked well for quantitative assessment of clinical reasoning indicators during history taking. Its three-factored structure helped to explore different aspects of clinical reasoning. Whether the CRI-HT-S has the potential to be used as a scale in objective structured clinical examinations (OCSEs) or in workplace-based assessments of clinical reasoning has to be investigated in further studies with larger student cohorts.

Project description:BackgroundThe illness script method employs a theoretical outline (e.g., epidemiology, pathophysiology, signs and symptoms, diagnostic tests, interventions) to clarify how clinicians organized medical knowledge for clinical reasoning in the diagnosis domain. We hypothesized that an educational intervention based on the illness script method would improve medical students' clinical reasoning skills in the diagnosis domain.MethodsThis study is a randomized controlled trial involving 100 fourth-year medical students in Shiraz Medical School, Iran. Fifty students were randomized to the intervention group, who were taught clinical reasoning skills based on the illness script method for three diseases during one clinical scenario. Another 50 students were randomized to the control group, who were taught the clinical presentation based on signs and symptoms of the same three diseases as the intervention group. The outcomes of interest were learner satisfaction with the intervention and posttest scores on both an internally developed knowledge test and a Script Concordance Test (SCT).ResultsOf the hundred participating fourth-year medical students, 47 (47%) were male, and 53 (53%) were female. On the knowledge test, there was no difference in pretest scores between the intervention and control group, which suggested a similar baseline knowledge in both groups; however, posttest scores in the intervention group were (15.74 ± 2.47 out of 20) statistically significantly higher than the control group (14.38 ± 2.59 out of 20, P = 0.009). On the SCT, the mean score for the intervention group (6.12 ± 1.95 out of 10) was significantly higher than the control group (4.54 ± 1.56 out of 10; P = 0.0001). Learner satisfaction data indicated that the intervention was well-received by students.ConclusionTeaching with the illness script method was an effective way to improve students' clinical reasoning skills in the diagnosis domain suggested by posttest and SCT scores for specific clinical scenarios. Whether this approach translates to improved generalized clinical reasoning skills in real clinical settings merits further study.

Project description:To successfully learn using open Internet resources, students must be able to critically search, evaluate and select online information, and verify sources. Defined as critical online reasoning (COR), this construct is operationalized on two levels in our study: (1) the student level using the newly developed Critical Online Reasoning Assessment (CORA), and (2) the online information processing level using event log data, including gaze durations and fixations. The written responses of 32 students for one CORA task were scored by three independent raters. The resulting score was operationalized as "task performance," whereas the gaze fixations and durations were defined as indicators of "process performance." Following a person-oriented approach, we conducted a process mining (PM) analysis, as well as a latent class analysis (LCA) to test whether-following the dual-process theory-the undergraduates could be distinguished into two groups based on both their process and task performance. Using PM, the process performance of all 32 students was visualized and compared, indicating two distinct response process patterns. One group of students (11), defined as "strategic information processers," processed online information more comprehensively, as well as more efficiently, which was also reflected in their higher task scores. In contrast, the distributions of the process performance variables for the other group (21), defined as "avoidance information processers," indicated a poorer process performance, which was also reflected in their lower task scores. In the LCA, where two student groups were empirically distinguished by combining the process performance indicators and the task score as a joint discriminant criterion, we confirmed these two COR profiles, which were reflected in high vs. low process and task performances. The estimated parameters indicated that high-performing students were significantly more efficient at conducting strategic information processing, as reflected in their higher process performance. These findings are so far based on quantitative analyses using event log data. To enable a more differentiated analysis of students' visual attention dynamics, more in-depth qualitative research of the identified student profiles in terms of COR will be required.

Project description:IntroductionEffective learning of physical examination skills (PES) requires suitable teaching and learning techniques and assessment methods. The Tribhuvan University (Nepal) curriculum recommends involving the departments of Medicine and Surgery in PES training (PEST) for second year students as a part of early clinical exposure. The project was developed to make teaching/learning of PES structured, involving eight clinical sciences departments and using appropriate methods for teaching and assessment in KIST Medical College, Nepal.MethodsIrby's three stages of clinical teaching model (Preparation, Teaching, Reflection), was applied for teaching. Skill acquisition was based on Millers' learning pyramid at "show how level" and Dreyfus' competency model at "competent level". Teaching/learning was conducted in small groups. A tutorial, demonstration and practice (TDS) model was developed for teaching/learning techniques based on a simple five-step method for teaching clinical skills. Assessment of effectiveness of training was done at "reaction level" as per Kirkpatrick's model based on students' feedback, "shows how level" as per Miller's pyramid of learning by OSCE and "competent level" as per Dreyfus' model using retro-pre questionnaire.ResultsThe analysis of retro-pre questionnaire based on the Dreyfus model found the average skill score (max score 184), before the introduction of the project module as 15.9 (median = 13.5) and after as 116.5 (median = 116). A paired t-test showed the difference to be statistically significant (100.5±23 and 95% CI 95.45 - 105.59). The average overall feedback score for the students on PES training based on seven items on a five point Likert scale was found to be 4.30. The mean total objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) score was 3.77 (SD+/- 0.33) out of 5; 80% of students scored more than 70%.ConclusionStudents learned most of the skills with the implementation of the structured PES module and did well in the OSCE. Students and faculty were satisfied with the training and assessment.

Dataset Information

Clinical reasoning for acute dyspnoea: comparison between final-year medical students from discipline- and competency-based undergraduate programmes.

Publications

Clinical reasoning for acute dyspnoea: comparison between final-year medical students from discipline- and competency-based undergraduate programmes.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets