Dataset Information

Can clinical case discussions foster clinical reasoning skills in undergraduate medical education? A randomised controlled trial.

ABSTRACT: 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.

SUBMITTER: Weidenbusch M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6731854 | biostudies-other | 2019 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Can clinical case discussions foster clinical reasoning skills in undergraduate medical education? A randomised controlled trial.

Weidenbusch Marc M Lenzer Benedikt B Sailer Maximilian M Strobel Christian C Kunisch Raphael R Kiesewetter Jan J Fischer Martin R MR Zottmann Jan M JM

BMJ open 20190906 9

<h4>Objective</h4>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.<h4>Design, setting, participants</h4>A single-centre randomised controlled trial with a par ...[more]

PMID: 31494596

Similar Datasets

Project description:Objective: The objective of this article is a description of the longitudinal communication curriculum in the Model Medicine Curriculum (MSM) at Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin. The authors describe the planning and integration of the curriculum into the study program, outline how communicative competence is taught and evaluated in the MSM, and identify which challenges need to be mastered in the process. Project description: Starting with the introduction of the MSM in 2010, students have been spending 102 class hours, spread out over seven semesters, practicing social and communicative competences in the interactive small group format "Communication, Interaction & Teamwork (KIT)". The course contents are closely linked to the topics covered each semester and increase in complexity over the course of their studies. The contents are selected by the KIT planning group whose members continually check the curriculum's timeliness and determine any changes. Students as well as instructors have opportunities for evaluating KIT throughout, and their evaluations are taken into consideration as KIT continues to be updated. Instructors from different disciplines teach KIT courses. They participate in mandatory didactic trainings that prepare them to teach KIT. During their 4th and 9th semesters, respectively, students take summative exams that test their communicative competence. Results: According to the semester evaluations by students and instructors, students participating in KIT improved their conversation management skills (students: M=2.2, SD=1.1, instructors: M=1.9, SD=0.7, on a scale of 1-5). In addition, students and graduates rate KIT to be (very) relevant, consider the degree to which it is taught in the MSM to be (very) high, and consider KIT to be a meaningful part of the curriculum. Students taking the summative exams in their 4th and 9th semesters achieve a mean score of 75.9%, respectively 76.9%, in the purely communicative stations and 82.6%, respectively 83.3%, in the global evaluation of communicative competence in clinical-practical stations. Discussion: Survey and exam results alike indicate that the communication training is well accepted by students and instructors and that the training led to an improvement in general and specific communicative skills. Due to a lack of control groups or a pre-post design, it has thus far not been possible to unequivocally demonstrate a causal relationship between communicative competence trainings and good test results. Quality control measures, such as trainings for instructors and regular course evaluations, have been designed to address any challenges in the implementation of the communication curriculum at the faculty level. Conclusion: Building on the experience with the Charité's Reformed Medical Curriculum, a longitudinal, competence-based communication curriculum was integrated into the MSM's overall curriculum. This measure remedied a gap in the medical training that many graduates of regular study programs had previously bemoaned (Jansen 2010 [1]).

Project description:Background64% of young medical professionals in Germany do not feel adequately prepared for the practical requirements of the medical profession. The goal of "outcome-orientated training" is to structure medical curricula based on the skills needed when entering the workforce after completing undergraduate medical education, and thus to bridge the gap between the skills graduates have attained and those necessary for a career in the medical profession. Outcome frameworks (OFs) are used for this purpose. In preparation for developing the National Competence-Based Catalogue of Learning Objectives for Medicine (NKLM) - the German OF - the "Consensus Statement of Practical Skills in Undergraduate Medical Education" (which structures the teaching and acquisition of practical skills in Germany and which strongly influenced the "Clinical-Practical Skills" chapter of the NKLM) was published in 2011. It is not uncommon for at least a decade to elapse between the definition and implementation of an OF and the students' graduation, which can further increase the gap between necessary and acquired skills. Thus, the purpose of this paper is to posit theses for future development in healthcare and to apply these theses to a current OF.MethodologyPartially structured interviews with experts were used to generate theses pertaining to general, future development in healthcare. These theses were assessed by physician experts based on the likelihood of implementation by the year 2025. The 288 learning goals of the consensus statement were assessed for their relevance for medical education in the interim.Results11 theses were generated for the development of medicine, and these theses were assessed and discussed by 738 experts. These theses include the increase in diseases associated with old age, the increasing significance of interprofessional cooperation, and the growing prevalence of telemedicine applications. Of the 288 learning goals of the consensus statement, 231 of the goals were assessed as relevant, and 57 were deemed irrelevant for the short-term future.DiscussionThe theses on the future of healthcare, which were generated in this study and which were validated by numerous experts, provide indications of future developments of overall requirements for medical school graduates. For example, when applied to the content of the "Clinical-Practical Skills" NKLM chapter, they largely validate the future relevance of developing practical skills while also providing indications for their further development as applied to the consensus statement.

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:BackgroundClinical reasoning plays a major role in the ability of doctors to make a diagnosis and reach treatment decisions. This paper describes the use of four clinical reasoning tests in the second National Medical Science Olympiad in Iran: key features (KF), script concordance (SCT), clinical reasoning problems (CRP) and comprehensive integrative puzzles (CIP). The purpose of the study was to design a multi instrument for multiple roles approach in clinical reasoning field based on the theoretical framework, KF was used to measure data gathering, CRP was used to measure hypothesis formation, SCT and CIP were used to measure hypothesis evaluation and investigating the combined use of these tests in the Olympiad. A bank of clinical reasoning test items was developed for emergency medicine by a scientific expert committee representing all the medical schools in the country. These items were pretested by a reference group and the results were analyzed to select items that could be omitted. Then 135 top-ranked medical students from 45 medical universities in Iran participated in the clinical domain of the Olympiad. The reliability of each test was calculated by Cronbach's alpha. Item difficulty and the correlation between each item and the total score were measured. The correlation between the students' final grade and each of the clinical reasoning tests was calculated, as was the correlation between final grades and another measure of knowledge, i.e., the students' grade point average.ResultsThe combined reliability for all four clinical reasoning tests was 0.91. Of the four clinical reasoning tests we compared, reliability was highest for CIP (0.91). The reliability was 0.83 for KF, 0.78 for SCT and 0.71 for CRP. Most of the tests had an acceptable item difficulty level between 0.2 and 0.8. The correlation between the score for each item and the total test score for each of the four tests was positive. The correlations between scores for each test and total score were highest for KF and CIP. The correlation between scores for each test and grade point average was low to intermediate for all four of the tests.ConclusionThe combination of these four clinical reasoning tests is a reliable evaluation tool that can be implemented to assess clinical reasoning skills in talented undergraduate medical students, however these data may not generalizable to whole medical students population. The CIP and KF tests showed the greatest potential to measure clinical reasoning skills. Grade point averages did not necessarily predict performance in the clinical domain of the national competitive examination for medical school students.

Project description:Developing a position on a socio-scientific issue and defending it using a well-reasoned justification involves complex cognitive skills that are challenging to both teach and assess. Our work centers on instructional strategies for fostering critical thinking skills in high school students using bioethical case studies, decision-making frameworks, and structured analysis tools to scaffold student argumentation. In this study, we examined the effects of our teacher professional development and curricular materials on the ability of high school students to analyze a bioethical case study and develop a strong position. We focused on student ability to identify an ethical question, consider stakeholders and their values, incorporate relevant scientific facts and content, address ethical principles, and consider the strengths and weaknesses of alternate solutions. 431 students and 12 teachers participated in a research study using teacher cohorts for comparison purposes. The first cohort received professional development and used the curriculum with their students; the second did not receive professional development until after their participation in the study and did not use the curriculum. In order to assess the acquisition of higher-order justification skills, students were asked to analyze a case study and develop a well-reasoned written position. We evaluated statements using a scoring rubric and found highly significant differences (p<0.001) between students exposed to the curriculum strategies and those who were not. Students also showed highly significant gains (p<0.001) in self-reported interest in science content, ability to analyze socio-scientific issues, awareness of ethical issues, ability to listen to and discuss viewpoints different from their own, and understanding of the relationship between science and society. Our results demonstrate that incorporating ethical dilemmas into the classroom is one strategy for increasing student motivation and engagement with science content, while promoting reasoning and justification skills that help prepare an informed citizenry.

Dataset Information

Can clinical case discussions foster clinical reasoning skills in undergraduate medical education? A randomised controlled trial.

Publications

Can clinical case discussions foster clinical reasoning skills in undergraduate medical education? A randomised controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets