Dataset Information

Clinical Case Discussions - a novel, supervised peer-teaching format to promote clinical reasoning in medical students.

ABSTRACT: Background: Clinical reasoning (CR) is a clinical core competence for medical students to acquire. While the necessity for CR teaching has been recognized since the early 20th century, to this day no consensus on how to best educate students in CR exists. Hence, few universities have incorporated dedicated CR teaching formats into their medical curriculum. We propose a novel case-based, peer-taught and physician-supervised collaborative learning format, dubbed "Clinical Case Discussions" (CCDs) to foster CR in medical students. Project description: We present the curricular concept of CCDs and its development according to a six-step approach (problem identification and general needs assessment; targeted needs assessment; goals and objectives; educational strategies; implementation; evaluation and feedback). Our goal is to strengthen the physician roles (CanMEDS/NKLM) and CR competence of medical students. CCDs are offered at our institution as an elective course and students work on real-life, complex medical cases through a structured approach. Over the course of five years we evaluated various aspects of the course and trained student teachers to optimize our course concept according to the feedback of our participants. We also obtained intro and exit self-assessments of CR competence using an established CR questionnaire. Results: We found an unmet need for CR teaching, as medical students in their clinical years view CR as highly important for later practice, but only 50% have ever heard of CR within the curriculum. Acceptance of CCDs was consistently high with over 85% of participants strongly agreeing that they would re-participate in the course and recommend it to a friend. Additionally, we observed significant improvements in CR self-assessments of participants. Conclusion: CCDs are a feasible teaching format to improve students' CR competence, have a high acceptance and involve students in medical education through peer-teaching.

SUBMITTER: Koenemann N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7499459 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Clinical Case Discussions - a novel, supervised peer-teaching format to promote clinical reasoning in medical students.

Koenemann Nora N Lenzer Benedikt B Zottmann Jan M JM Fischer Martin R MR Weidenbusch Marc M

GMS journal for medical education 20200915 5

<b>Background:</b> Clinical reasoning (CR) is a clinical core competence for medical students to acquire. While the necessity for CR teaching has been recognized since the early 20<sup>th</sup> century, to this day no consensus on how to best educate students in CR exists. Hence, few universities have incorporated dedicated CR teaching formats into their medical curriculum. We propose a novel case-based, peer-taught and physician-supervised collaborative learning format, dubbed "Clinical Case Di ...[more]

PMID: 32984507

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundRepeated formative assessments using key feature questions have been shown to enhance clinical reasoning. Key feature questions augmented by videos presenting clinical vignettes may be more effective than text-based questions, especially in a setting where medical students are free to choose the format they would like to work with. This study investigated learning outcomes related to clinical reasoning in students using video- or text-based key feature questions according to their individual preferences.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that repeated exposure to video-based key feature questions enhances clinical reasoning to a greater extent than repeated exposure to text-based key feature questions if students are allowed to choose between those different formats on their own.MethodsIn this monocentric, prospective, nonrandomized trial, fourth-year medical students attended 12 computer-based case seminars during which they worked on case histories containing key feature questions. Cases were available in a text- and a video-based format. Students chose their preferred presentation format at the beginning of each case seminar. Student performance in key feature questions was assessed in formative entry, exit, and retention exams and was analyzed with regard to preceding exposure to video- or text-based case histories.ResultsOf 102 eligible students, 75 provided written consent and complete data at all study exams (response rate=73.5%). A majority of students (n=52) predominantly chose the text-based format. Compared with these, students preferring the video-based format achieved a nonsignificantly higher score in the exit exam (mean 76.2% [SD 12.6] vs 70.0% [SD 19.0]; P=.15) and a significantly higher score in the retention exam (mean 75.3% [SD 16.6] vs 63.4% [SD 20.3]; P=.02). The effect was independent of the video- or text-based presentation format, which was set as default in the respective exams.ConclusionsDespite students' overall preference for text-based case histories, the learning outcome with regard to clinical reasoning was higher in students with higher exposure to video-based items. Time-on-task is one conceivable explanation for these effects as working with video-based items was more time-consuming. The baseline performance levels of students do not account for the results as the preceding summative exam results were comparable across the 2 groups. Given that a substantial number of students chose a presentation format that was less effective, students might need to be briefed about the beneficial effects of using video-based case histories to be able to make informed choices about their study methods.

Project description:PurposeGraduating medical students need broad clinical diagnostic reasoning skills that integrate learning across clinical specialties to deal with undifferentiated patient problems. The opportunity to acquire these skills may be limited during clinical placements on increasingly specialized hospital wards. We developed an intervention of regular general practitioner (GP) facilitated teaching in hospital placements to enable students to develop broad clinical diagnostic reasoning. The intervention was piloted, refined and delivered to a whole cohort of medical students at the start of their third year. This paper examines whether students perceived opportunities to improve their broad diagnostic clinical reasoning through our intervention.MethodsGP-facilitated teaching sessions were delivered weekly in hospital placements to small groups of 6–8 students for 90 mins over 6 weeks. Students practiced clinical reasoning with real patient cases that they encountered on their placements. Evaluation of learning outcomes was conducted through a student questionnaire using Likert scales with free-text boxes for additional explanation. Focus groups were conducted to gain a more in-depth understanding of student perspectives.ResultsAs high as 87% of students agreed that their broad clinical diagnostic reasoning ability had improved. Thematic analysis of the qualitative data revealed four factors supporting this improvement: practicing the hypothetico-deductive method, using real patient cases, composing student groups from different speciality placements and the breadth of the facilitators’ knowledge. Students additionally reported enhanced person-centredness in terms of understanding the patient’s perspective and journey. Students perceived that the added value of general practitioner facilitators lay in their broad knowledge base and knowledge of patient needs in the community.ConclusionOur results suggest that medical students can develop broad clinical diagnostic reasoning skills in hospital settings through regular GP-facilitated teaching. Our approach has the advantage of working within the established curricular format of hospital placements and being deliverable at scale to whole 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:OBJECTIVE:Fostering clinical reasoning is a mainstay of medical education. Based on the clinicopathological conferences, we propose a case-based peer teaching approach called clinical case discussions (CCDs) to promote the respective skills in medical students. This study compares the effectiveness of different CCD formats with varying degrees of social interaction in fostering clinical reasoning. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS:A single-centre randomised controlled trial with a parallel design was conducted at a German university. Study participants (N=106) were stratified and tested regarding their clinical reasoning skills right after CCD participation and 2 weeks later. INTERVENTION:Participants worked within a live discussion group (Live-CCD), a group watching recordings of the live discussions (Video-CCD) or a group working with printed cases (Paper-Cases). The presentation of case information followed an admission-discussion-summary sequence. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES:Clinical reasoning skills were measured with a knowledge application test addressing the students' conceptual, strategic and conditional knowledge. Additionally, subjective learning outcomes were assessed. RESULTS:With respect to learning outcomes, the Live-CCD group displayed the best results, followed by Video-CCD and Paper-Cases, F(2,87)=27.07, p<0.001, partial η2=0.384. No difference was found between Live-CCD and Video-CCD groups in the delayed post-test; however, both outperformed the Paper-Cases group, F(2,87)=30.91, p<0.001, partial η2=0.415. Regarding subjective learning outcomes, the Live-CCD received significantly better ratings than the other formats, F(2,85)=13.16, p<0.001, partial η2=0.236. CONCLUSIONS:This study demonstrates that the CCD approach is an effective and sustainable clinical reasoning teaching resource for medical students. Subjective learning outcomes underline the importance of learner (inter)activity in the acquisition of clinical reasoning skills in the context of case-based learning. Higher efficacy of more interactive formats can be attributed to positive effects of collaborative learning. Future research should investigate how the Live-CCD format can further be improved and how video-based CCDs can be enhanced through instructional support.

Project description:BackgroundPeer-assisted learning has been shown to be constructive in numerous aspects of undergraduate medical education. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of peer-assisted teaching of medical English skills to non-native English-speaking students.MethodsA medical English conversation course was conducted at Damascus University by a group of students. Targeted participants were intermediate level fellow students from the same program. A longitudinal study was carried out between 1 st to 31 st March 2019 to assess changes in self-assessment of English language skills among course participants. Pre- and post-course appraisal involved a review of previous experience with medical English language, a self-assessment of five English language skills, and an objective measurement of medical English knowledge. In addition, participants were requested to respond to a set of statements related to the importance and the usefulness of peer-assisted teaching of medical English skills. Paired-sample Student t-test was used to compare pre- and post-course appraisal results.Results42 students attended the course and completed pre- and post-course appraisals in full. Data analyses showed a statistically significant increase in participants' confidence in speaking medical English in public ( p<0.001) and using English in various medical settings (presenting and discussing cases, writing clinical reports, interviewing patients and reading English medical texts). Objective measurements of medical English knowledge confirmed a significant increase in participants' knowledge of methods of administration of therapeutics, knowledge of human body parts in English and familiarity with English medical abbreviations. Most participants agreed that peer-education was effective in teaching medical English skills to non-native English-speaking students and in increasing their confidence when using English in real-life medical scenarios.ConclusionsThe present study highlights the effectiveness of peer-assisted teaching of medical English skills to non-native English-speaking medical students. Further validation is required and should compare the effectiveness of traditional versus peer-assisted teaching approaches.

Project description:PurposeTumor boards serve as established platforms for interdisciplinary expert discussions and therapeutic recommendations tailored to individual patient characteristics. Despite their significance, medical students often lack exposure to such interdisciplinary discussions as tumor boards are currently not integrated into medical curricula. To address this, we aimed to enhance future physicians' interdisciplinary communication skills and subject-specific knowledge by introducing an interactive series of five linked tumor board seminars within the domain of neuro-oncology.MethodsWe developed a neuro-oncological student tumor board using a flipped-classroom format. The primary objectives of this case-centered approach included fostering an understanding of the tumor board process, active participation in multidisciplinary case discussions, honing appropriate communication strategies, and creating personalized therapy plans that consider inputs from all relevant disciplines, individual patient factors, and ethical considerations. To gauge the effectiveness of the seminar series, we administered structured pre- and post-course questionnaires.ResultsFourteen medical students in third to fifth year participated in the pilot series. Despite its organizational complexity, the interdisciplinary seminars were feasible. Students demonstrated significant growth in competence, aligned with predefined learning objectives. Notably, they appreciated the supportive learning environment and interactive teaching format, which kindled their interest in interdisciplinary oncology.ConclusionActive participation in a student tumor board can empower students to tackle the diverse challenges of caring for cancer patients within an interdisciplinary team during the early stages of their careers. The student tumor board represents an innovative, learner-centered approach to teach interdisciplinary cancer treatment, communication strategies, and ethical aspects of medical practice.

Dataset Information

Clinical Case Discussions - a novel, supervised peer-teaching format to promote clinical reasoning in medical students.

Publications

Clinical Case Discussions - a novel, supervised peer-teaching format to promote clinical reasoning in medical students.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets