Jaarsma Thomas, Jarodzka Halszka, Nap Marius, van Merriënboer Jeroen J G, Boshuizen Henny P A
Welten Institute, Open University of The Netherlands, P.O. Box 2960, 6401 DL, Heerlen, The Netherlands.
Pathology Department, Atrium Medical Center, Heerlen, The Netherlands.
Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2015 Oct;20(4):1089-106. doi: 10.1007/s10459-015-9589-x. Epub 2015 Feb 13.
Expertise studies in the medical domain often focus on either visual or cognitive aspects of expertise. As a result, characteristics of expert behaviour are often described as either cognitive or visual abilities. This study focuses on both aspects of expertise and analyses them along three overarching constructs: (1) encapsulations, (2) efficiency, and (3) hypothesis testing. This study was carried out among clinical pathologists performing an authentic task: diagnosing microscopic slides. Participants were 13 clinical pathologists (experts), 12 residents in pathology (intermediates), and 13 medical students (novices). They all diagnosed seven cases in a virtual microscope and gave post hoc explanations for their diagnoses. The collected data included eye movements, microscope navigation, and verbal protocols. Results showed that experts used lower magnifications and verbalized their findings as diagnoses. Also, their diagnostic paths were more efficient, including fewer microscope movements and shorter reasoning chains. Experts entered relevant areas later in their diagnostic process, and visited fewer of them. Intermediates used relatively high magnifications and based their diagnoses on specific abnormalities. Also, they took longer to reach their diagnosis and checked more relevant areas. Novices searched in detail, described findings by their appearances, and uttered long reasoning chains. These results indicate that overarching constructs can justly be identified: encapsulations and efficiency are apparent in both visual and cognitive aspects of expertise.
医学领域的专业技能研究通常侧重于专业技能的视觉或认知方面。因此,专家行为的特征通常被描述为认知能力或视觉能力。本研究关注专业技能的这两个方面,并沿着三个总体架构对其进行分析:(1)封装,(2)效率,以及(3)假设检验。本研究是在执行一项真实任务的临床病理学家中进行的:诊断显微镜载玻片。参与者包括13名临床病理学家(专家)、12名病理学住院医师(中级人员)和13名医科学生(新手)。他们都在虚拟显微镜下诊断了7个病例,并对自己的诊断给出事后解释。收集的数据包括眼动、显微镜导航和口头记录。结果显示,专家使用较低的放大倍数,并将他们的发现表述为诊断。此外,他们的诊断路径更有效率,包括较少的显微镜移动和较短的推理链。专家在诊断过程中较晚进入相关区域,并且查看的区域较少。中级人员使用相对较高的放大倍数,并根据特定异常进行诊断。而且,他们做出诊断花费的时间更长,检查的相关区域更多。新手会进行详细搜索,根据外观描述发现,并说出较长的推理链。这些结果表明,可以合理地识别出总体架构:封装和效率在专业技能的视觉和认知方面都很明显。