Richmond Anna, Cooper Nicola, Gay Simon, Atiomo William, Patel Rakesh
Education Centre, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Department of Acute Medicine, University Hospitals of Derby and Burton NHS Foundation Trust, Derby, UK.
Med Educ. 2020 Aug;54(8):709-719. doi: 10.1111/medu.14137. Epub 2020 Apr 22.
Clinical reasoning refers to the cognitive processes used by individuals as they formulate a diagnosis or treatment plan. Clinical reasoning is dependent on formal and experiential knowledge. Developing the ability to acquire and recall knowledge effectively for both analytical and non-analytical cognitive processing has patient safety implications. This realist review examines the way educational interventions develop analytical and non-analytical reasoning ability in undergraduate education. A realist review is theory-driven, seeking not only to identify if an intervention works, but also understand the reasons why, for whom, and in what circumstances. The aim of this study is to develop understanding about the way educational interventions develop effective analytical and non-analytical clinical reasoning ability, when they do, for whom and in what circumstances.
Literature from a scoping search, combined with expert opinion and researcher experience was synthesised to generate an initial programme theory (IPT). Four databases were searched and articles relevant to the developing theory were selected as appropriate. Factors affecting educational outcomes at the individual student, teacher and wider organisational levels were investigated in order to further refine the IPT.
A total of 28 papers contributed to the overall programme theory. The review predominantly identified evidence of mechanisms for interventions at the individual student level. Key student level factors influencing the effectiveness of interventions included an individual's self-confidence, self-efficacy and pre-existing level of knowledge. These contexts influenced a variety of educational interventions, impacting both positively and negatively on educational outcomes.
Development of analytical and non-analytical clinical reasoning ability requires activities that enhance knowledge acquisition and recall alongside the accumulation of clinical experience and opportunities to practise reasoning in real or simulated clinical environments. However, factors such as pre-existing knowledge and self-confidence influence their effectiveness, especially amongst individuals with 'low knowledge.' Promoting non-analytical reasoning once novices acquire more clinical knowledge is important for the development of clinical reasoning in undergraduate education.
临床推理是指个体在制定诊断或治疗方案时所运用的认知过程。临床推理依赖于形式知识和经验知识。培养有效获取和回忆知识以进行分析性和非分析性认知处理的能力对患者安全具有重要意义。本项实在论综述探讨了教育干预措施在本科教育中培养分析性和非分析性推理能力的方式。实在论综述以理论为驱动,不仅旨在确定一项干预措施是否有效,还旨在理解其生效的原因、对象以及情境。本研究的目的是加深对教育干预措施培养有效分析性和非分析性临床推理能力的方式、时间、对象及情境的理解。
综合范围检索的文献、专家意见和研究人员经验,生成初始项目理论(IPT)。检索了四个数据库,并酌情选择了与发展中的理论相关的文章。研究了个体学生、教师和更广泛组织层面影响教育成果的因素,以进一步完善IPT。
共有28篇论文为整体项目理论做出了贡献。该综述主要确定了个体学生层面干预机制的证据。影响干预效果的关键学生层面因素包括个体的自信心、自我效能感和先前的知识水平。这些背景影响了多种教育干预措施,对教育成果产生了积极和消极的影响。
培养分析性和非分析性临床推理能力需要开展活动,以加强知识获取和回忆,同时积累临床经验,并提供在真实或模拟临床环境中进行推理练习的机会。然而,诸如先前知识和自信心等因素会影响其效果,尤其是在“知识水平较低”的个体中。一旦新手获得更多临床知识,促进非分析性推理对于本科教育中临床推理的发展至关重要。