Dataset Information

The Challenging Case Conference: A Gamified Approach to Clinical Reasoning in the Video Conference Era.

ABSTRACT: The development of clinical reasoning abilities is a core competency of emergency medicine (EM) resident education and has historically been accomplished through case conferences and clinical learning. The advent of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has fundamentally changed these traditional learning opportunities by causing a nationwide reliance on virtual education environments and reducing the clinical diversity of cases encountered by EM trainees.We propose an innovative case conference that combines low-fidelity simulation with elements of gamification to foster the development of clinical reasoning skills and increase engagement among trainees during a virtual conference. After a team of residents submits a real clinical case that challenged their clinical reasoning abilities, a different team of residents "plays" through a gamified, simulated version of the case live on a video conference call. The case concludes with a facilitated debriefing led by a simulation-trained faculty, where both the resident teams and live virtual audience discuss the challenges of the case. Participants described how the Challenging Case Conference improved their perceptions of their clinical reasoning skills. Audience members reported increased engagement compared to traditional conferences. Participants also reported an unexpected, destigmatizing effect on the discussion of medical errors produced by this exercise. Residency programs could consider implementing a similar case conference as a component of their conference curriculum.

SUBMITTER: Kobner S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7806328 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The Challenging Case Conference: A Gamified Approach to Clinical Reasoning in the Video Conference Era.

Kobner Scott S Grassini Molly M Le Nhu-Nguyen NN Riddell Jeff J

The western journal of emergency medicine 20201223 1

The development of clinical reasoning abilities is a core competency of emergency medicine (EM) resident education and has historically been accomplished through case conferences and clinical learning. The advent of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has fundamentally changed these traditional learning opportunities by causing a nationwide reliance on virtual education environments and reducing the clinical diversity of cases encountered by EM trainees.We propose an innovative case conference that combines ...[more]

PMID: 33439820

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionIn recent years, researchers have recognized the need to examine the relative effectiveness of different simulation approaches and the experiences of physicians operating within such environments. The current study experimentally examined the reflective judgments, cognitive processing, and clinical reasoning performance of physicians across live and video simulation environments.MethodsThirty-eight physicians were randomly assigned to a live scenario or video case condition. Both conditions encompassed two components: (a) patient encounter and (b) video reflection activity. Following the condition-specific patient encounter (i.e., live scenario or video), the participants completed a Post Encounter Form (PEF), microanalytic questions, and a mental effort question. Participants were then instructed to re-watch the video (i.e., video condition) or a video recording of their live patient encounter (i.e., live scenario) while thinking aloud about how they came to the diagnosis and management plan.ResultsAlthough significant differences did not emerge across all measures, physicians in the live scenario condition exhibited superior performance in clinical reasoning (i.e., PEF) and a distinct profile of reflective judgments and cognitive processing. Generally, the live condition participants focused more attention on aspects of the clinical reasoning process and demonstrated higher level cognitive processing than the video group.ConclusionsThe current study sheds light on the differential effects of live scenario and video simulation approaches. Physicians who engaged in live scenario simulations outperformed and showed a distinct pattern of cognitive reactions and judgments compared to physicians who practiced their clinical reasoning via video simulation. Additionally, the current study points to the potential advantages of video self-reflection following live scenarios while also shedding some light on the debate regarding whether video-guided reflection, specifically, is advantageous. The utility of context-specific, micro-level assessments that incorporate multiple methods as physicians complete different parts of clinical tasks is also discussed.

Project description:BackgroundDespite a major research focus on clinical reasoning over the last several decades, a method of evaluating the clinical reasoning process that is both objective and comprehensive is yet to be developed.The aim of this study was to test whether a dual approach, using two measures of clinical reasoning, the Clinical Reasoning Problem (CRP) and the Script Concordance Test (SCT), provides a valid, reliable and targeted analysis of clinical reasoning characteristics to facilitate the development of diagnostic thinking in medical students.MethodsThree groups of participants, general practitioners, and third and fourth (final) year medical students completed 20 on-line clinical scenarios -10 in CRP and 10 in SCT format. Scores for each format were analysed for reliability, correlation between the two formats and differences between subject-groups.ResultsCronbach's alpha coefficient ranged from 0.36 for SCT 1 to 0.61 for CRP 2, Statistically significant correlations were found between the mean f-score of the CRP 2 and total SCT 2 score (0.69); and between the mean f-score for all CRPs and all mean SCT scores (0.57 and 0.47 respectively). The pass/fail rates of the SCT and CRP f-score are in keeping with the findings from the correlation analysis (i.e. 31% of students (11/35) passed both, 26% failed both, and 43% (15/35) of students passed one but not the other test), and suggest that the two formats measure overlapping but not identical characteristics. One-way ANOVA showed consistent differences in scores between levels of expertise with these differences being significant or approaching significance for the CRPs.ConclusionSCTs and CRPs are overlapping and complementary measures of clinical reasoning. Whilst SCTs are more efficient to administer, the use of both measures provides a more comprehensive appraisal of clinical skills than either single measure alone, and as such could potentially facilitate the customised teaching of clinical reasoning for individuals. The modest reliability of SCTs and CRPs in this study suggests the need for an increased number of items for testing. Further work is needed to determine the suitability of a combined approach for assessment purposes.

Project description:ImportanceCase reports that externalize expert diagnostic reasoning are utilized for clinical reasoning instruction but are difficult to search based on symptoms, final diagnosis, or differential diagnosis construction. Computational approaches that uncover how experienced diagnosticians analyze the medical information in a case as they formulate a differential diagnosis can guide educational uses of case reports.ObjectiveTo develop a "reasoning-encoded" case database for advanced clinical reasoning instruction by applying natural language processing (NLP), a sub-field of artificial intelligence, to a large case report library.DesignWe collected 2525 cases from the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) Clinical Pathological Conference (CPC) from 1965 to 2020 and used NLP to analyze the medical terminology in each case to derive unbiased (not prespecified) categories of analysis used by the clinical discussant. We then analyzed and mapped the degree of category overlap between cases.ResultsOur NLP algorithms identified clinically relevant categories that reflected the relationships between medical terms (which included symptoms, signs, test results, pathophysiology, and diagnoses). NLP extracted 43,291 symptoms across 2525 cases and physician-annotated 6532 diagnoses (both primary and related diagnoses). Our unsupervised learning computational approach identified 12 categories of medical terms that characterized the differential diagnosis discussions within individual cases. We used these categories to derive a measure of differential diagnosis similarity between cases and developed a website ( universeofcpc.com ) to allow visualization and exploration of 55 years of NEJM CPC case series.ConclusionsApplying NLP to curated instances of diagnostic reasoning can provide insight into how expert clinicians correlate and coordinate disease categories and processes when creating a differential diagnosis. Our reasoning-encoded CPC case database can be used by clinician-educators to design a case-based curriculum and by physicians to direct their lifelong learning efforts.

Project description:ObjectivesThe primary objectives of this study were to examine the regulatory processes of medical students as they completed a diagnostic reasoning task and to examine whether the strategic quality of these regulatory processes were related to short-term and longer-term medical education outcomes.MethodsA self-regulated learning (SRL) microanalytic assessment was administered to 71 second-year medical students while they read a clinical case and worked to formulate the most probable diagnosis. Verbal responses to open-ended questions targeting forethought and performance phase processes of a cyclical model of SRL were recorded verbatim and subsequently coded using a framework from prior research. Descriptive statistics and hierarchical linear regression models were used to examine the relationships between the SRL processes and several outcomes.ResultsMost participants (90%) reported focusing on specific diagnostic reasoning strategies during the task (metacognitive monitoring), but only about one-third of students referenced these strategies (e.g. identifying symptoms, integration) in relation to their task goals and plans for completing the task. After accounting for prior undergraduate achievement and verbal reasoning ability, strategic planning explained significant additional variance in course grade (ΔR(2 ) = 0.15, p < 0.01), second-year grade point average (ΔR(2) = 0.14, p < 0.01), United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 score (ΔR(2) = 0.08, p < 0.05) and National Board of Medical Examiner subject examination score in internal medicine (ΔR(2) = 0.10, p < 0.05).ConclusionsThese findings suggest that most students in the formative stages of learning diagnostic reasoning skills are aware of and think about at least one key diagnostic reasoning process or strategy while solving a clinical case, but a substantially smaller percentage set goals or develop plans that incorporate such strategies. Given that students who developed more strategic plans achieved better outcomes, the potential importance of forethought regulatory processes is underscored.

Dataset Information

The Challenging Case Conference: A Gamified Approach to Clinical Reasoning in the Video Conference Era.

Publications

The Challenging Case Conference: A Gamified Approach to Clinical Reasoning in the Video Conference Era.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets