Convergent Validity of a Novel Clinical Reasoning Tool in Clerkship Medical Students: Pilot Study

Covin, Yvonne N.; Wick, Neda; Longo, Palma J.

doi:10.1007/s40670-019-00857-4

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The Clinical Reasoning Task checklist (CRT) was developed as a taxonomy of 24 tasks physicians use to reason through clinical cases [17]. These tasks have been used to explore the reasoning patterns used by medical students, residents and attending physicians [28,29]. Students earned one point each time a CRT task was used, including repeats, in accordance with previously published protocols [29,30].…”

Section: Instrumentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Empirical comparison of three assessment instruments of clinical reasoning capability in 230 medical students

Covin¹,

Longo²,

Wick³

et al. 2020

BMC Med Educ

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Several instruments intend to measure clinical reasoning capability, yet we lack evidence contextualizing their scores. The authors compared three clinical reasoning instruments [Clinical Reasoning Task (CRT), Patient Note Scoring rubric (PNS), and Summary Statement Assessment Rubric (SSAR)] using Messick's convergent validity framework in pre-clinical medical students. Scores were compared to a validated clinical reasoning instrument, Clinical Data Interpretation (CDI). Method: Authors administered CDI and the first clinical case to 235 students. Sixteen randomly selected students (four from each CDI quartile) wrote a note on a second clinical case. Each note was scored with CRT, PNS, and SSAR. Final scores were compared to CDI. Results: CDI scores did not significantly correlate with any other instrument. A large, significant correlation between PNS and CRT was seen (r = 0.71; p = 0.002). Conclusions: None of the tested instruments outperformed the others when using CDI as a standard measure of clinical reasoning. Differing strengths of association between clinical reasoning instruments suggest they each measure different components of the clinical reasoning construct. The large correlation between CRT and PNS scoring suggests areas of novice clinical reasoning capability, which may not be yet captured in CDI or SSAR, which are weighted toward knowledge synthesis and hypothesis testing.

show abstract

Section: Instrumentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These tasks have been used to explore the reasoning patterns used by medical students, residents and attending physicians [28,29]. Students earned one point each time a CRT task was used, including repeats, in accordance with previously published protocols [29,30]. Total scores were assigned by adding the total number of CRT tasks used.…”

Section: Instrumentsmentioning

confidence: 99%