Abstract
Abstract
 Clinical reasoning is the process by which veterinary surgeons integrate a multitude of clinical and contextual factors to make decisions about the diagnoses, treatment options and prognoses of their patients. The brain utilises two methods to achieve this: type one and type two reasoning. Type one relies on shortcuts such as pattern-recognition and heuristics to deduce answers without involving working memory. Type two uses working memory to deliberately compute logical analyses. Both reasoning methods have sources of errors, and research has shown that diagnostic accuracy is increased when they are used together when problem-solving. Despite this, it appears unlikely that clinical reasoning ‘skill’ can be improved; instead, the most effective way to improve reasoning performance experimentally appears to be by increasing and rearranging knowledge. As yet, there is no evidence that overall clinical reasoning error can be reduced in practice.
 
Highlights
Many times a day, practising veterinary surgeons in all domains have to make clinical decisions regarding the appropriate diagnosis, treatment and prognosis of their patients
Clinical reasoning is the process by which veterinary surgeons integrate a multitude of clinical and contextual factors to make decisions about the diagnoses, treatment options and prognoses of their patients
There are two methods of clinical reasoning used by humans: type one, which does not rely on working memory, and type two, which does
Summary
Many times a day, practising veterinary surgeons in all domains have to make clinical decisions regarding the appropriate diagnosis, treatment and prognosis of their patients. Do these decisions rest on the clinical presentation of the animal before them, and on a myriad of contextual factors including finances, available equipment, resources and client wishes (Everitt, 2011; and Durning et al, 2012). To understand the mental processes that embody clinical reasoning, we must look towards cognitive psychology, the scientific study of cognitive abilities (Norman, 2005) Researchers in this field have determined that humans use two overarching reasoning methods, known as type one and type two reasoning. These two systems have their own unique advantages and disadvantages, our need for both
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
