Gehlhar Kirsten, Klimke-Jung Kathrin, Stosch Christoph, Fischer Martin R
Carl von Ossietzky University of Oldenburg, School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Oldenburg, Germany.
Ruhr University Bochum, Bochum, Germany.
GMS Z Med Ausbild. 2014 May 15;31(2):Doc23. doi: 10.3205/zma000915. eCollection 2014.
As a fundamental element of medical practice, clinical reasoning should be cultivated in courses of study in human medicine. To date, however, no conclusive evidence has been offered as to what forms of teaching and learning are most effective in achieving this goal. The Diagnostic Thinking Inventory (DTI) was developed as a means of measuring knowledge-unrelated components of clinical reasoning. The present pilot study examines the adequacy of this instrument in measuring differences in the clinical reasoning of students in varying stages of education in three curricula of medical studies.
The Diagnostic Thinking Inventory (DTI) comprises 41 items in two subscales ("Flexibility in Thinking" and "Structure of Knowledge in Memory"). Each item contains a statement or finding concerning clinical reasoning in the form of a stem under which a 6-point scale presents opposing conclusions. The subjects are asked to assess their clinical thinking within this range. The German-language version of the DTI was completed by 247 student volunteers from three schools and varying clinical semesters. In a quasi-experimental design, 219 subjects from traditional and model courses of study in the German state of North Rhine-Westphalia took part. Specifically, these were 5(th), 6(th) and 8(th) semester students from the model course of study at Witten/Herdecke University (W/HU), from the model (7(th) and 9(th) semester) and traditional (7(th) semester) courses of study at the Ruhr University Bochum (RUB) and from the model course of study (9(th) semester) at the University of Cologne (UoC). The data retrieved were quantitatively assessed.
The reliability of the questionnaire in its entirety was good (Cronbach's alpha between 0.71 and 0.83); the reliability of the subscales ranged between 0.49 and 0.75. The different groups were compared using the Mann-Whitney test, revealing significant differences among semester cohorts within a school as well as between students from similar academic years in different schools. Among the participants from the model course of study at the W/HU, scores increased from the 5(th) to the 6(th) semester and from the 5(th) to the 9(th) semester. Among individual cohorts at RUB, no differences could be established between model and traditional courses of study or between 7(th) and 9(th) semester students in model courses of study. Comparing all participating highest semester students, the 8(th) semester participants from the W/HU achieved the highest scores - significantly higher than those of 9(th) semester RUB students or 9(th) semester UoC students. Scores from the RUB 9(th) semester participants were significantly higher than those of the 9(th) semester UoC participants.
The German-language version of the DTI measures self-assessed differences in diagnostic reasoning among students from various semesters and different model and traditional courses of study with satisfactory reliability. The results can be used for discussion in the context of diverse curricula. The DTI is therefore appropriate for further research that can then be correlated with the different teaching method characteristics and outcomes of various curricula.
作为医学实践的基本要素,临床推理应在医学课程学习中加以培养。然而,迄今为止,对于何种教学形式在实现这一目标方面最为有效,尚无确凿证据。诊断思维量表(DTI)是作为一种测量临床推理中与知识无关的组成部分的手段而开发的。本试点研究考察了该工具在测量医学三个课程不同教育阶段学生临床推理差异方面的适用性。
诊断思维量表(DTI)由两个分量表(“思维灵活性”和“记忆中的知识结构”)中的41个项目组成。每个项目都包含一个关于临床推理的陈述或发现,形式为一个题干,其下有一个6分制量表,呈现相反的结论。要求受试者在此范围内评估自己的临床思维。来自三所学校、处于不同临床学期的247名学生志愿者完成了德语版的DTI。在一项准实验设计中,来自德国北莱茵 - 威斯特法伦州传统课程和示范课程的219名受试者参与其中。具体来说,这些受试者包括维滕/黑尔德克大学(W/HU)示范课程的第5、6和8学期学生,鲁尔大学波鸿分校(RUB)示范课程(第7和9学期)和传统课程(第7学期)的学生,以及科隆大学(UoC)示范课程(第9学期)的学生。对获取的数据进行了定量评估。
问卷整体的信度良好(克朗巴哈系数在0.71至0.83之间);各分量表的信度在0.49至0.75之间。使用曼 - 惠特尼检验对不同组进行比较,结果显示同一学校内不同学期队列之间以及不同学校同一年级学生之间存在显著差异。在W/HU示范课程的参与者中,分数从第5学期到第6学期以及从第5学期到第9学期有所提高。在RUB的各个队列中,示范课程和传统课程之间或示范课程的第7和第9学期学生之间未发现差异。比较所有参与的最高学期学生,W/HU的第8学期参与者得分最高——显著高于RUB第9学期学生或UoC第9学期学生。RUB第9学期参与者的得分显著高于UoC第9学期参与者。
德语版的DTI以令人满意的信度测量了来自不同学期以及不同示范和传统课程的学生在诊断推理方面的自我评估差异。研究结果可用于在不同课程背景下进行讨论。因此,DTI适用于进一步的研究,随后可将其与不同课程的不同教学方法特点和结果相关联。