BackgroundThe cognitive pathways that lead to an accurate diagnosis and efficient management plan can touch on various clinical reasoning tasks (1). These tasks can be employed at any point during the clinical reasoning process and though the four distinct categories of framing, diagnosis, management, and reflection provide some insight into how these tasks map onto clinical reasoning, much is still unknown about the task-based clinical reasoning process. For example, when and how are these tasks typically used? And more importantly, do these clinical reasoning task processes evolve when patient encounters become complex and/or challenging (i.e. with contextual factors)?MethodsWe examine these questions through the lens of situated cognition, context specificity, and cognitive load theory. Sixty think-aloud transcripts from 30 physicians who participated in two separate cases – one with a contextual factor and one without – were coded for 26 clinical reasoning tasks (1). These tasks were organized temporally, i.e. when they emerged in their think-aloud process. Frequencies of each of the 26 tasks were aggregated, categorized, and visualized in order to analyze task category sequences.ResultsWe found that (a) as expected, clinical tasks follow a general sequence, (b) contextual factors can distort this emerging sequence, and (c) the presence of contextual factors prompts more experienced physicians to clinically reason similar to that of less experienced physicians.ConclusionsThese findings add to the existing literature on context specificity in clinical reasoning and can be used to strengthen teaching and assessment of clinical reasoning.
Sleep problems are common among United States (U.S.) veterans and are associated with poor health, mental health, and functioning. Yet, little is known about insufficient sleep and factors contributing to sleep disparities among veterans experiencing homelessness. We conducted semi-structured interviews to better understand the clinical, environmental, and structural factors contributing to insufficient sleep among veterans and to improve care for this population. Interviews were conducted with 13 providers caring for veterans experiencing homelessness, including physicians, psychologists, nurses, social workers, and peer support specialists. Providers worked at a West Coast VA institution serving a large population of veterans experiencing homelessness. Interviews were analyzed for themes pertaining to sleep using the social-ecological model as a framework. On an individual level, factors influencing sleep included psychiatric disorders and use of substances. On an interpersonal level, factors included safety concerns while sleeping. On an environmental level, factors included noise and proximity to others as barriers to sleep. On the organizational level, logistical issues scheduling sleep clinic appointments and lack of transportation to attend sleep clinic appointments were identified as treatment barriers. These findings can inform future research studying the impact of sleep on health and housing outcomes and interventions addressing sleep among veterans experiencing homelessness.
Purpose Clinical reasoning is the process of observing, collecting, analyzing, and interpreting patient information to arrive at a diagnosis and management plan. Although clinical reasoning is foundational in undergraduate medical education (UME), the current literature lacks a clear picture of the clinical reasoning curriculum in preclinical phase of UME. This scoping review explores the mechanisms of clinical reasoning education in preclinical UME. Method A scoping review was performed in accordance with the Arksey and O’Malley framework methodology for scoping reviews and is reported using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis for Scoping Reviews. Results The initial database search identified 3,062 articles. Of these, 241 articles were selected for a full-text review. Twenty-one articles, each reporting a single clinical reasoning curriculum, were selected for inclusion. Six of the reports included a definition of clinical reasoning, and 7 explicitly reported the theory underlying the curriculum. Reports varied in the identification of clinical reasoning content domains and teaching strategies. Only 4 curricula reported assessment validity evidence. Conclusions Based on this scoping review, we recommend 5 key principles for educators to consider when reporting clinical reasoning curricula in preclinical UME: (1) explicitly define clinical reasoning within the report, (2) report clinical reasoning theory(ies) used in the development of the curriculum, (3) clearly identify which clinical reasoning domains are addressed in the curriculum, (4) report validity evidence for assessments when available, and (5) describe how the reported curriculum fits into the larger clinical reasoning education at the institution.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.