• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
Do different response formats affect how test takers approach a clinical reasoning task? An experimental study on antecedents of diagnostic accuracy using a constructed response and a selected response format.不同的反应格式是否会影响考生处理临床推理任务的方式?使用构造反应和选择反应格式对诊断准确性的影响的实验研究。
Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2021 Oct;26(4):1339-1354. doi: 10.1007/s10459-021-10052-z. Epub 2021 May 11.
2
Learning clinical reasoning: how virtual patient case format and prior knowledge interact.学习临床推理:虚拟患者病例格式和先验知识如何相互作用。
BMC Med Educ. 2020 Mar 14;20(1):73. doi: 10.1186/s12909-020-1987-y.
3
Fuzzy-trace theory: dual processes in memory, reasoning, and cognitive neuroscience.模糊痕迹理论:记忆、推理和认知神经科学中的双重加工
Adv Child Dev Behav. 2001;28:41-100. doi: 10.1016/s0065-2407(02)80062-3.
4
The effect of question format and task difficulty on reasoning strategies and diagnostic performance in Internal Medicine residents.问题形式和任务难度对内科住院医师推理策略及诊断表现的影响
Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2008 Nov;13(4):453-62. doi: 10.1007/s10459-006-9057-8. Epub 2007 Jan 20.
5
A Bayesian perspective on constructing a written assessment of probabilistic clinical reasoning in experienced clinicians.从贝叶斯视角构建针对经验丰富临床医生概率性临床推理的书面评估。
J Eval Clin Pract. 2017 Feb;23(1):44-48. doi: 10.1111/jep.12469. Epub 2015 Oct 20.
6
Measures of Bayesian Reasoning Performance on 'Normal' and 'Natural' Frequency Tasks.“正常”和“自然”频率任务中贝叶斯推理表现的度量。
J Gen Psychol. 2016 Jul-Sep;143(3):185-214. doi: 10.1080/00221309.2016.1200531.
7
Effect of response format on cognitive reflection: Validating a two- and four-option multiple choice question version of the Cognitive Reflection Test.反应格式对认知反射的影响:验证认知反射测验的二选一和四选一多选题版本。
Behav Res Methods. 2018 Dec;50(6):2511-2522. doi: 10.3758/s13428-018-1029-4.
8
Adding up to good Bayesian reasoning: Problem format manipulations and individual skill differences.总计良好的贝叶斯推理:问题形式操纵与个体技能差异
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2017 Apr;146(4):577-591. doi: 10.1037/xge0000280.
9
FRAMED: a framework facilitating insight problem solving.FRAMED:一个促进洞察问题解决的框架。
Diagnosis (Berl). 2024 Feb 23;11(3):240-243. doi: 10.1515/dx-2023-0152. eCollection 2024 Aug 1.
10
Influences of OSCE design on students' diagnostic reasoning.客观结构化临床考试(OSCE)设计对学生诊断推理的影响。
Med Educ. 2015 Feb;49(2):203-14. doi: 10.1111/medu.12635.

引用本文的文献

1
ChatGPT in medical school: how successful is AI in progress testing?ChatGPT 在医学院:人工智能在进展测试中表现如何?
Med Educ Online. 2023 Dec;28(1):2220920. doi: 10.1080/10872981.2023.2220920.
2
Beyond competence: Towards a more holistic perspective in medical education.超越能力:走向更全面的医学教育视角。
Med Educ. 2022 Jan;56(1):4-6. doi: 10.1111/medu.14692. Epub 2021 Nov 28.
3
Differential diagnosis checklists reduce diagnostic error differentially: A randomised experiment.鉴别诊断检查表可减少诊断错误的差异:一项随机实验。
Med Educ. 2021 Oct;55(10):1172-1182. doi: 10.1111/medu.14596. Epub 2021 Aug 18.

本文引用的文献

1
Self-monitoring accuracy does not increase throughout undergraduate medical education.自我监测的准确性并不会在整个本科医学教育中提高。
Med Educ. 2020 Apr;54(4):320-327. doi: 10.1111/medu.14057. Epub 2020 Mar 2.
2
Think Twice: Effects on Diagnostic Accuracy of Returning to the Case to Reflect Upon the Initial Diagnosis.三思而后行:重新审视初始诊断对提高诊断准确性的影响。
Acad Med. 2020 Aug;95(8):1223-1229. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000003153.
3
Very-short-answer questions: reliability, discrimination and acceptability.简答题:信度、区分度和可接受性。
Med Educ. 2018 Apr;52(4):447-455. doi: 10.1111/medu.13504. Epub 2018 Feb 1.
4
Electronic assessment of clinical reasoning in clerkships: A mixed-methods comparison of long-menu key-feature problems with context-rich single best answer questions.临床推理的电子评估:长菜单关键特征问题与上下文丰富的单项最佳答案问题的混合方法比较。
Med Teach. 2017 May;39(5):476-485. doi: 10.1080/0142159X.2017.1297525. Epub 2017 Mar 10.
5
The Role of Physicians' First Impressions in the Diagnosis of Possible Cancers without Alarm Symptoms.医生的第一印象在无警示症状的可能癌症诊断中的作用
Med Decis Making. 2017 Jan;37(1):9-16. doi: 10.1177/0272989X16644563. Epub 2016 Apr 25.
6
The time course of conflict on the Cognitive Reflection Test.认知反射测验中的冲突时间进程。
Cognition. 2016 May;150:109-18. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2016.01.015. Epub 2016 Feb 17.
7
Assessing clinical reasoning (ASCLIRE): Instrument development and validation.评估临床推理(ASCLIRE):工具的开发与验证
Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2015 Dec;20(5):1205-24. doi: 10.1007/s10459-015-9596-y. Epub 2015 Mar 1.
8
Disrupting diagnostic reasoning: do interruptions, instructions, and experience affect the diagnostic accuracy and response time of residents and emergency physicians?干扰诊断推理:打断、指令和经验会影响住院医师和急诊医师的诊断准确性及反应时间吗?
Acad Med. 2015 Apr;90(4):511-7. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000614.
9
Early diagnostic suggestions improve accuracy of GPs: a randomised controlled trial using computer-simulated patients.早期诊断建议提高全科医生的诊断准确性:一项使用计算机模拟患者的随机对照试验
Br J Gen Pract. 2015 Jan;65(630):e49-54. doi: 10.3399/bjgp15X683161.
10
Should essays and other "open-ended"-type questions retain a place in written summative assessment in clinical medicine?论文及其他“开放式”问题在临床医学书面总结性评估中是否应保留一席之地?
BMC Med Educ. 2014 Nov 28;14:249. doi: 10.1186/s12909-014-0249-2.

不同的反应格式是否会影响考生处理临床推理任务的方式?使用构造反应和选择反应格式对诊断准确性的影响的实验研究。

Do different response formats affect how test takers approach a clinical reasoning task? An experimental study on antecedents of diagnostic accuracy using a constructed response and a selected response format.

机构信息

Centre for Health Sciences Education, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Postboks 1161 Blindern, 0318, Oslo, Norway.

Department of Emergency Medicine, Inselspital University Hospital, University of Berne, 3010, Freiburgstrasse, Berne, Switzerland.

出版信息

Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2021 Oct;26(4):1339-1354. doi: 10.1007/s10459-021-10052-z. Epub 2021 May 11.

DOI:10.1007/s10459-021-10052-z
PMID:33977409
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8452553/
Abstract

The use of response formats in assessments of medical knowledge and clinical reasoning continues to be the focus of both research and debate. In this article, we report on an experimental study in which we address the question of how much list-type selected response formats and short-essay type constructed response formats are related to differences in how test takers approach clinical reasoning tasks. The design of this study was informed by a framework developed within cognitive psychology which stresses the importance of the interplay between two components of reasoning-self-monitoring and response inhibition-while solving a task or case. The results presented support the argument that different response formats are related to different processing behavior. Importantly, the pattern of how different factors are related to a correct response in both situations seem to be well in line with contemporary accounts of reasoning. Consequently, we argue that when designing assessments of clinical reasoning, it is crucial to tap into the different facets of this complex and important medical process.

摘要

在评估医学知识和临床推理的过程中,使用反应格式一直是研究和讨论的焦点。在本文中,我们报告了一项实验研究,旨在探讨清单式选择题和短文式简答题这两种题型与考生在处理临床推理任务时的方法差异有多大关联。本研究的设计受到认知心理学框架的启发,该框架强调了在解决任务或案例时,推理的自我监控和反应抑制这两个组成部分之间相互作用的重要性。所呈现的结果支持了这样一种观点,即不同的反应格式与不同的处理行为有关。重要的是,在这两种情况下,不同因素与正确答案的关联模式似乎与当代推理理论非常吻合。因此,我们认为,在设计临床推理评估时,必须挖掘出这个复杂而重要的医学过程的不同方面。