Scholarlink

Background <p>Many medical schools have incorporated clinical reasoning (CR) courses into their pre-clinical curricula to address the quality and safety issue of diagnostic error. It is unknown how students use concepts and practices from pre-clinical CR courses once in clerkships.</p> Objective <p>We sought to understand how students utilize CR concepts from a pre-clinical course during clerkships and to identify facilitators and barriers to the use of reasoning concepts.</p> Design <p>We used structured interviews to gain insight into medical students’ experiences with CR concepts in clerkships.</p> Participants <p>We interviewed 16 students who had completed a pre-clinical CR course and subsequently completed a neurology, internal medicine, or pediatrics clerkship.</p> Approach <p>We used constructivist grounded theory to perform a qualitative analysis and to develop a theoretical model to describe findings.</p> Key Results <p>Insights fell into three main areas: (1) CR concept carryover, representing concepts taught in the CR course, such as problem representation, illness scripts, schema, and prioritized&#xa0;differential diagnosis, which were utilized in clerkships; (2) CR concept reinforcers, which included the clerkship setting and supervising physicians who emphasized and provided feedback on CR; and (3) CR concept diminishers, which included time constraints and supervisors who were unfamiliar with or did not reinforce CR concepts.</p> Conclusions <p>Concepts taught in a pre-clinical CR course influenced how students prepared for and navigated clinical encounters. Contextual factors both enhanced and inhibited the utilization of CR concepts. Our findings align with social learning theories including social cognitive theory and ecological psychology. This contextual view—taking into account interactions between personal, social, and environmental factors—can help educators integrate CR education from the classroom to the clinical setting.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Clerkship Students’ Use of Clinical Reasoning Concepts After a Pre-clinical Reasoning Course

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年1月2日

查看全文
  • Shradha A. Kulkarni,
  • Gurpreet Dhaliwal,
  • Arianne Teherani,
  • Denise M. Connor

摘要

Background

Many medical schools have incorporated clinical reasoning (CR) courses into their pre-clinical curricula to address the quality and safety issue of diagnostic error. It is unknown how students use concepts and practices from pre-clinical CR courses once in clerkships.

Objective

We sought to understand how students utilize CR concepts from a pre-clinical course during clerkships and to identify facilitators and barriers to the use of reasoning concepts.

Design

We used structured interviews to gain insight into medical students’ experiences with CR concepts in clerkships.

Participants

We interviewed 16 students who had completed a pre-clinical CR course and subsequently completed a neurology, internal medicine, or pediatrics clerkship.

Approach

We used constructivist grounded theory to perform a qualitative analysis and to develop a theoretical model to describe findings.

Key Results

Insights fell into three main areas: (1) CR concept carryover, representing concepts taught in the CR course, such as problem representation, illness scripts, schema, and prioritized differential diagnosis, which were utilized in clerkships; (2) CR concept reinforcers, which included the clerkship setting and supervising physicians who emphasized and provided feedback on CR; and (3) CR concept diminishers, which included time constraints and supervisors who were unfamiliar with or did not reinforce CR concepts.

Conclusions

Concepts taught in a pre-clinical CR course influenced how students prepared for and navigated clinical encounters. Contextual factors both enhanced and inhibited the utilization of CR concepts. Our findings align with social learning theories including social cognitive theory and ecological psychology. This contextual view—taking into account interactions between personal, social, and environmental factors—can help educators integrate CR education from the classroom to the clinical setting.