Problem Representation, Background Evidence, Analysis, Recommendation: An Oral Case Presentation Tool to Promote Diagnostic Reasoning

Md, Cristina Carter; Md, Nicole Akar-Ghibril; Sestokas, Jeff; Dixon, Gabrina; Bradford, Wilhelmina; Ottolini, Mary

doi:10.1016/j.acap.2017.08.002

Cited by 6 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A review of the literature indicated the availability of several assessment tools for diagnostic reasoning, but we found that the ART was unique in containing behavioral descriptors linked to various levels of performance in the major domains of the diagnostic reasoning process. 3,4,[11][12][13][14] Apart from enhancing teachers' ability to assess their learners' diagnostic reasoning performance, the ART also offered shared construct and language that facilitated the delivery of feedback and aid in conation. The ART developers recognized the need for faculty training for optimal use of this tool and so created training modules for each domain of the ART (freely available online).…”

Section: Application Of the Toolmentioning

confidence: 99%

Teaching Diagnostic Reasoning to Faculty Using an Assessment for Learning Tool: Training the Trainer

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction There is a need for a standardized approach to understand and assess clinical reasoning in medical learners. The Assessment of Reasoning Tool was developed based on prevalent theories and frameworks using a multidisciplinary expert panel. As the tool provides a standardized rubric for assessing clinical reasoning, we designed an interactive train-the-trainer workshop for clinical educators and education leaders interested in improving their teaching skills and/or introducing curricula surrounding diagnostic reasoning. Methods In this workshop, participants were exposed to the major domains of diagnostic reasoning and how to apply it to the assessment of a learner's skills. Kolb's experiential learning was the underlying model, which we showcased by using multiple interactive techniques, including small-group discussion, peer sharing, and case practice. We presented the workshop at a national conference of pediatric educators and as a faculty development workshop at a single institution. Participants were asked to complete a survey after the workshop to gauge their reactions and look for areas of improvement. Results A total of 34 participants attended the two workshops. Participants rated the workshop favorably, with most planning to make a change to their practice. Comments were largely positive, emphasizing the benefits of the interactive approach. Discussion The workshop and teaching materials represent an important early step in the workplace-based assessment of diagnostic reasoning in medical learners. Grounded in the clinical reasoning literature, the workshop offers one approach to assessing these skills in learners with or without direct observation of clinical skills.

show abstract