Teaching Of Clinical Reasoning Research Articles

Teaching Clinical Reasoning to Veterinary Medical Learners with a Case Example

Clinical reasoning is an essential competence of veterinary graduands. It is a complex competence with cognitive, metacognitive, social, and situational activities. The literature on clinical reasoning in veterinary medical education is relatively scarce or focused on theoretical rather than practical applications. In this review, we address the practicality of teaching clinical reasoning to veterinary learners utilizing a practical example of a cow with allergic rhinitis. Learners should be guided through all the domains of clinical reasoning, including concepts, data collection and analysis, take action, and reflection on an encounter. Each of these domains needs to be clearly but concisely explained and practiced repeatedly by learners throughout the veterinary curricula. The teaching of clinical reasoning should start as early in the curriculum as possible, preferably in the pre-clinical years, with a gradual scaffolding and building of complexity before work-based learning begins, with an increase in demanding for advanced clinical reasoning competence. The teaching of clinical reasoning is best performed in specialized sessions and continued as a horizontally and vertically integrated activity.

Effects of SNAPPS in clinical reasoning teaching: a systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Clinical reasoning is crucial in medical practice, yet its teaching faces challenges due to varied clinical experiences, limited time, and absence from competency frameworks. Despite efforts, effective teaching methodologies remain elusive. Strategies like the One Minute Preceptor (OMP) and SNAPPS are proposed as solutions, particularly in workplace settings. SNAPPS, introduced in 2003, offers a structured approach but lacks comprehensive evidence of its effectiveness. Methodological shortcomings hinder discerning its specific effects. Therefore, a systematic review is proposed to evaluate SNAPPS' impact on clinical reasoning teaching. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and CINAHL for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing SNAPPS against other methods. Data selection and extraction were performed in duplicate. Bias and certainty of evidence were evaluated using Cochrane RoB-2 and GRADE approach. We identified five RCTs performed on medical students and residents. Two compared SNAPPS with an active control such as One Minute Preceptor or training with feedback. None reported the effects of SNAPPS in workplace settings (Kirkpatrick Level 3) or patients (Kirkpatrick Level 4). Low to moderate certainty of evidence suggests that SNAPPS increases the total presentation length by increasing discussion length. Low to moderate certainty of evidence may increase the number of differential diagnoses and the expression of uncertainties. Low certainty of evidence suggests that SNAPPS may increase the odds of trainees initiating a management plan and seeking clarification. Evidence from this systematic review suggests that SNAPPS has some advantages in terms of clinical reasoning, self-directed learning outcomes, and cost-effectiveness. Furthermore, it appears more beneficial when used by residents than medical students. However, future research should explore outcomes outside SNAPPS-related outcomes, such as workplace or patient-related outcomes.

Steps to improve the teaching of clinical reasoning in dermatology: A scoping review and proposal

AbstractClinical reasoning (CR) is an area of active interest since faults in the diagnostic process can result in errors and possibly delays in care or even patient harm. The purpose of this scoping review was to collect information from the medical literature on approaches utilized to teach and assess CR in dermatology, identify gaps, and prepare a proposal on how to enhance the speciality's ability to develop trainee CR skills. We conducted a review of the published literature (1990–2020) from four databases. The initial search yielded 780 papers, and 42 relevant CR publications met inclusion criteria. Demographic, thematic content, theoretical frameworks, continuum of authenticity, competency/milestone, and assessment/educational intervention data were recorded by two screeners. Trainees at different educational levels from 17 different countries have been assessed in the dermatology literature. Most publications were of a single intervention, appeared underpowered, and had small sample sizes. Only two publications examined work‐based assessments (use real patients/stimuli). Knowledge‐based studies were the dominant theoretical framework with no studies exclusively focused on process‐based CR interventions. Simulation was well represented with 23 (55%) investigations. Rigorous studies that examine CR teaching and assessment in dermatology are lacking. Evidence‐based best practices for use of work‐based assessments, especially direct observation, need to be developed/adapted for dermatology and validated. Dermatology training programs would benefit from longitudinal data on trainee CR development, process‐based CR educational programs, metacognition CR exploration specific to skin disease diagnosis, and studies that yield practical recommendations on how to structure multi‐faceted assessments that assess CR.

Minding the gap: towards a shared clinical reasoning lexicon across the pre-clerkship/clerkship transition

ABSTRACT Teaching and learning of clinical reasoning are core principles of medical education. However, little guidance exists for faculty leaders to navigate curricular transitions between pre-clerkship and clerkship curricular phases. This study compares how educational leaders in these two phases understand clinical reasoning instruction. Previously reported cross-sectional surveys of pre-clerkship clinical skills course directors, and clerkship leaders were compared. Comparisons focused on perceived importance of a number of core clinical reasoning concepts, barriers to clinical reasoning instruction, level of familiarity across the undergraduate medical curriculum, and inclusion of clinical reasoning instruction in each area of the curriculum. Analyses were performed using the Mann Whitney U test. Both sets of leaders rated lack of curricular time as the largest barrier to teaching clinical reasoning. Clerkship leaders also noted a lack of faculty with skills to teach clinical reasoning concepts as a significant barrier (p < 0.02), while pre-clerkship leaders were more likely to perceive that these concepts were too advanced for their students (p < 0.001). Pre-clerkship leaders reported a higher level of familiarity with the clerkship curriculum than clerkship leaders reported of the pre-clerkship curriculum (p < 0.001). As faculty transition students from the pre-clerkship to the clerkship phase, a shared understanding of what is taught and when, accompanied by successful faculty development, may aid the development of longitudinal, milestone-based clinical reasoning instruction.

Clinical educators of the medical colleges of South Asia need to be trained for educating clinical reasoning skills to medical students

Clinical reasoning is the process of reasoning to decide for managing the patient using data and applying medical knowledge and experience. Clinical reasoning skills are essential skills for the novice learner of medical education to learn the process of clinical diagnosis, thereby providing safe and effectual health care. These skills learning help clinicians arrive at a diagnosis and prevent making diagnostic errors which are reported to occur in five to 15% of cases. Poor clinical reasoning leads to a diagnostic error which may jeopardize the patient’s safety. The clinical reasoning skills are not generally explicitly imparted to the learners especially during their undergraduate learning period even though these may be documented in the curriculum of medical undergraduate study. The key elements in the clinical reasoning process are the patients’ story, data acquisition, problem representation, hypothesis generation, search and selection of illness script, differential diagnosis, and a leading diagnosis. Clinical reasoning is a complex process, difficult to teach learners and assess their skills, consumes clinical medical educators’ time, and requires resources for teaching and learning. There must be educational strategies both at the undergraduate and postgraduate levels to promote diagnostic reasoning skills; for this, clinical medical educators must be acquainted/trained in how to convey the reasoning approaches to beginners. The clinical medical educator has to a play dual role; provide quality care to the patients, teach clinical reasoning skills to the learners, and assess their skills to make them independent decision-makers and problem solvers in clinical settings. Clinical reasoning skills are among the core competencies to be learned by medical learners to become competent clinicians. The clinical competence of the clinician cannot be superseded by the advancement of technology and evidence-based medicine. All these three need to be integrated to minimize the errors in diagnosis. Clinical educators must unequivocally nurture and enhance the capacity of learners to include and integrate both analytical and non-analytical clinical reasoning strategies into their approach to arrive at diagnosis. The clinical medical educator must identify the learners’ approach to clinical reasoning and enable them to follow the right approaches towards clinical reasoning. Clinical reasoning skills are better learned/imparted during clinical encounters and deliberate practice enriches learning of these skills. Enhancement of clinical reasoning skills learning can be achieved through deliberate practice. The clinical medical educator may organize and supervise the simulation-based deliberate practice sessions for the learners to boost their clinical reasoning skills. For the deliberate practice of clinical reasoning skills, The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) has developed an application NEJM Healer, a screen-based interactive patient encounter (Virtual Bedside Encounter) through which learners are involved in each element of clinical reasoning process. Virtual Reality (VR) is also gaining popularity in educating the medical students and has been demonstrated to be beneficial in enhancing students’ comprehension and memory as well as in the development of transferable skills like surgical methods. The medical schools in South Asian countries need to reiterate the development/enhancement of clinical reasoning skills of both medical undergraduate and postgraduate learners. To achieve this objective, medical colleges must regularly organize training for clinical medical educators to facilitate students’ learning in reasoning skills, and for assessing their skills, and provide feedback to the learners. The institutes should also invest in infrastructure to pursue the use of modern technologies like VR, skills labs, etc. to attain this objective.

A Team-based Learning Approach During Pediatric Clerkship to Promote Clinical Reasoning.

Clinical reasoning skills are essential to medical practice. The problem lies in assuming junior medical students with limited experience develop clinical reasoning and decision-making skills passively and solely through clinical exposure. To prepare learners for independent practice and care for future patients, explicit teaching and assessment of clinical reasoning in low-stakes, collaborative learning environments are needed. The key-feature question (KFQs) format is an assessment approach that focuses on the reasoning and decision-making aspects of medical problems rather than knowledge recall. This report describes the development, implementation, and evaluation of a team-based learning (TBL) approach using KFQs to foster clinical reasoning in the third-year pediatric clerkship at our institution. Over the first 2 years of implementation (2017-18, 2018-19), 278 students participated in TBL sessions. Mean individual student scores significantly improved in the group setting for both academic years (P<.001). Individual scores were moderately positively correlated with their total summative Objective Structured Clinical Examination score (r[275]=0.51; P<.001). The correlation between individual score and their multiple-choice question examination was weaker at 0.29 (P<.001) but remained positive. A TBL session using KFQs to both teach and assess clinical reasoning in clerkship students may help educators identify students with gaps in knowledge and/or reasoning. The next steps include developing and implementing individualized coaching opportunities, and expanding this approach within the undergraduate medical curriculum. Outcome measures to assess clinical reasoning in authentic patient encounters require further research and development.

How team clinical reasoning occurs on ward rounds: Implications for learning.

Ward rounds offer a rich environment for learning about team clinical reasoning. We aimed to assess how team clinical reasoning occurs on ward rounds to inform efforts to enhance the teaching of clinical reasoning. We performed focused ethnography of ward rounds over a 6-week period, during which we observed five different teams. Each day team comprised one senior physician, one senior resident, one junior resident, two interns and one medical student. Twelve 'night-float' residents who discussed new patients with the day team were also included. Field notes were analysed using content analysis. We analysed 41 new patient presentations and discussions on 23 different ward rounds. The median duration of case presentations and discussions was 13.0minutes (IQR, 10.0-18.0minutes). More time was devoted to information sharing (median 5.5minutes; IQR, 4.0-7.0minutes) than any other activity, followed by discussion of management plans (median 4.0minutes; IQR, 3.0-7.8minutes). Nineteen (46%) cases did not include discussion of a differential diagnosis for the chief concern. We identified two themes relevant to learning: (1) linear versus iterative approaches to team-based diagnosis and (2) the influence of hierarchy on participation in clinical reasoning discussions. The ward teams we observed spent far less time discussing differential diagnoses compared with information sharing. Junior learners such as medical students and interns contributed less frequently to team clinical reasoning discussions. In order to maximise student learning, strategies to engage junior learners in team clinical reasoning discussions on ward rounds may be needed.

Teaching Students How to Think: A Longitudinal Qualitative Study of Preclerkship Clinical Reasoning Instruction

ABSTRACT Introduction An objective of undergraduate medical education is to teach students how to think like physicians through a process called clinical reasoning. Currently, clerkship directors often feel that students enter their clinical years with a marginal comprehension of clinical reasoning concepts; instruction in this area could be improved. Although there have been previous educational studies assessing curricular interventions to improve the instruction of clinical reasoning, it is not yet known what happens at an individual level between an instructor and a small group of students in the teaching of clinical reasoning. This research will identify how clinical reasoning is being taught in a longitudinal clinical reasoning course. Methods The Introduction to Clinical Reasoning course is a 15-month-long case-based course held in the preclinical curriculum of the USU. Individual sessions involve small-group learning with approximately seven students per group. Throughout the academic year of 2018-2019, 10 of these sessions were videotaped and transcribed. All participants provided informed consent. A thematic analysis was performed using a constant comparative approach. Transcripts were analyzed until thematic sufficiency was reached. Results Over 300 pages of text were analyzed; new themes ceased to be identified after the eighth session. Topics included obstetrics, general pediatric issues, jaundice, and chest pain; these sessions were taught either by attendings, fellows, or fourth-year medical students with attending supervision. The thematic analysis revealed themes associated with clinical reasoning processes, themes associated with knowledge organization, and a theme associated with clinical reasoning in the military. The clinical reasoning process themes included problem list construction and refinement, differential diagnosis, naming and defending a leading diagnosis, and clinical reasoning heuristics. The knowledge organization themes included illness script development and refinement and semantic competence. The final theme was military relevant care. Conclusions In individual teaching sessions, preceptors emphasized problem lists, differential diagnoses, and leading diagnoses in a course designed to strengthen diagnostic reasoning in preclerkship medical students. The use of illness scripts was more often implicitly used rather than explicitly stated, and students used these sessions to use and apply new vocabularies related to a clinical presentation. Instruction in clinical reasoning could be improved by encouraging faculty to provide further context to their thinking, by encouraging the comparing and contrasting of illness scripts, and by using a shared vocabulary for clinical reasoning. Limitations of this study include that it was done in the context of a clinical reasoning course and that it was done at a military medical school, which may limit generalizability. Future studies could determine if faculty development could improve the frequency of references to the clinical reasoning processes that could improve student readiness for clerkship.

Teaching clinical reasoning among undergraduate medical students: A crossover randomized trial

Background &amp; Objective: Many clinical reasoning teaching techniques have been reported in the literature. The authors focused on 2 teaching techniques of clinical reasoning, the technique Summarize, Narrow, Analyze, Probe the preceptor, Plan, Self-selected topic (SNAPPS) and the Clinical Reasoning Technique (CRT), and compared their efficiency to improve the clinical reasoning competencies of third-year undergraduate medical students. Materials &amp; Methods: The authors performed a prospective randomized, controlled, non-blinded crossover trial including year-3 undergraduate medical students. Judgment criteria consisted of the scores attributed to a test assessing the cognitive competencies of the participants which was a structured summary performed by the students after each session. Besides, a satisfaction Likert-scale questionnaire was fulfilled by the students. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS software (version 20.0). Results: Seventy-two students were included with a mean age of 21.03 (SD:2,30) years. The mean scores of the students allocated to the CRT arm reached 4.62 (SD:2.93)versus 4.99 (SD:2.93) for the SNAPPS arm. No significant statistical difference was observed between the mean scores according to the method used. The analysis of the satisfaction questionnaire revealed that 75% of the students preferred CRT because of the collaborative work performed. Conclusion: This study highlights the need for varying techniques to improve the critical reasoning skills of medical students. Besides, it pointed out students' preference for collaborative approaches illustrating socio-constructivist theories of learning.

One-minute preceptor and SNAPPS for clinical reasoning: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Clinical reasoning teaching strategies could be important models to teach healthcare trainees. This study aims to assess the effectiveness of clinical reasoning teaching strategies (one-minute preceptor (OMP) and SNAPPS) for developing clinical reasoning skills, attitudes and satisfaction of medical/healthcare students and post-graduate trainees as compared to controls. A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled studies, with no restriction on language or publication date, were carried out by searching the PubMed, SCOPUS, ERIC, Web of Science, Embase and Cochrane Library databases. The risk of bias of the studies selected was determined using Cochrane's risk-of-bias tool (RoB 2) and the quality of evidence used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation system. Of the 1066 articles retrieved, 12 were included in the systematic review and 10 in the meta-analysis. The results showed a growing body of literature on the use of strategies for teaching clinical reasoning that consisted predominantly of low-quality quasi-experimental studies. When only randomised controlled trials were included, analyses showed effectiveness among both healthcare students and post-graduate trainees for a series of outcomes, including total presentation length, duration of discussion, number of basic attributes, number of justified diagnoses in differential diagnoses and number of uncertainties expressed. Lastly, results for SNAPPS were better than for OMP relative to the control group. The strategies for teaching clinical reasoning improved the performance of healthcare students and professionals on this skill, promoting deeper discussion of clinical cases and a higher number of differential diagnoses. Further good-quality trials are needed to corroborate these findings. PROSPERO Registration: CRD42020175992.

Developing a European longitudinal and interprofessional curriculum for clinical reasoning.

Clinical reasoning is a complex and crucial ability health professions students need to acquire during their education. Despite its importance, explicit clinical reasoning teaching is not yet implemented in most health professions educational programs. Therefore, we carried out an international and interprofessional project to plan and develop a clinical reasoning curriculum with a train-the-trainer course to support educators in teaching this curriculum to students. We developed a framework and curricular blueprint. Then we created 25 student and 7 train-the-trainer learning units and we piloted 11 of these learning units at our institutions. Learners and faculty reported high satisfaction and they also provided helpful suggestions for improvements. One of the main challenges we faced was the heterogeneous understanding of clinical reasoning within and across professions. However, we learned from each other while discussing thesedifferent views and perspectives on clinical reasoning and were able to come to a shared understanding as the basis for developing the curriculum. Our curriculum fills an important gap in the availability of explicit clinical reasoning educational materials both for students and faculty and is unique with having specialists from different countries, schools, and professions. Faculty time and time for teaching clinical reasoning in existing curricula remain important barriers for implementation of clinical reasoning teaching.

Estratégias de ensino do raciocínio clínico nos cursos de Medicina do Brasil - revisão integrativa

Abstract: Introduction: Clinical reasoning is considered one of the main skills that must be developed by medical students, as it allows the establishment of diagnostic hypotheses and directs investigative and diagnostic strategies using a rational approach. Although educators have traditionally focused the teaching method on the analytical model, many medical professors face the challenge in their daily lives of finding new strategies to help their students develop clinical reasoning. Objective: To carry out an integrative literature review to identify the strategies used in the teaching-learning process of clinical reasoning in Brazilian medical schools. Method: The methodology used consists of six steps: 1. creation of the research question; 2. definition of inclusion and exclusion criteria; 3. list of information to be extracted; 4. evaluation of included studies; 5. interpretation of results and 6. presentation of the review. Results: Most studies indicate that the teaching of clinical reasoning is carried out through discussions of clinical cases, incidentally, in different disciplines or through the use of active methodologies such as PBL, TBL and CBL. Only three studies presented at conferences disclosed experiences related to the implementation of a mandatory curricular discipline specifically aimed at teaching clinical reasoning. The teaching of clinical reasoning is prioritized in internships in relation to the clinical and pre-clinical phases. Final considerations: There are few studies that analyze how clinical reasoning is taught to medical students in Brazilian medical schools. Although more studies are needed, we can observe the lack of theoretical knowledge about clinical reasoning as one of the main causes of the students’ difficulty in developing clinical reasoning.

The cognitive apprenticeship: advancing reasoning education by thinking aloud.

Teaching clinical reasoning has long challenged educators because it requires familiarity with reasoning concepts, experience with describing thinking, and comfort with exposing uncertainty and error. We propose that teachers adopt the cognitive apprenticeship model and a method of disclosing uncertainty known as intellectual streaking. These approaches reflect a shift in the educator's mindset from transmitting medical knowledge to broadcasting cognition. We provide several examples to guide the adoption of these strategies and make recommendations for teachers and training programs to improve the teaching of clinical reasoning.

Teaching of Clinical Reasoning Guided by Illness Script Theory.

Teaching of clinical reasoning (CR) can be facilitated by educational strategies guided by illness script theory. To evaluate the effects of an educational strategy guided by illness script theory on the diagnostic accuracy of chest pain in medical students. Experimental study in 3 phases, with 18 third-year medical students completing phase 3. Phases 1 and 2 had 27 students. In phase 1, each participant solved 8 clinical cases (6 of chest pain and 2 distractors). In phase 2, participants were divided into 2 groups, which distinctly trained 3 of the chest pain diagnoses from phase 1. In phase 3, after 1 week, each participant solved 8 new cases, with the same diagnoses as phase 1. Case resolution time and diagnostic accuracy were evaluated. The significance level adopted for statistical analysis was p < 0.05. In phase 3, both groups showed improved diagnostic accuracy and reduced case resolution time for the trained diagnoses, with no transfer of learning. For these diagnoses, the diagnostic accuracy scores in phases 1 and 3 were: group 1 = 1.00, IQR [0.00 to 1.00] versus 2.00, IQR [2.00 to 2.50], p = 0.017 and group 2 = 1.00, IQR [0.66 to 1.17] versus 3.00, IQR [1.33 to 3.00], p = 0.006. Case resolution times in seconds were: group 1: 485, IQR [450 to 583] versus 318, IQR [284 to 418], p = 0.027 and group 2: 655, IQR [543 to 740] versus 408, IQR [337 to 569], p = 0.010. The proposed strategy seems to contribute to improved diagnostic accuracy, and it may be considered for teaching CR.

Implementation of three knowledge-oriented instructional strategies to teach clinical reasoning: Self-explanation, a concept mapping exercise, and deliberate reflection: AMEE Guide No. 150

The teaching of clinical reasoning is essential in medical education. This guide has been written to provide educators with practical advice on the design, development, and implementation of three knowledge-oriented instructional strategies for the teaching of clinical reasoning to medical students: Self-explanation (SE), a Clinical Reasoning Mapping Exercise (CREsME), and Deliberate Reflection (DR). We first synthesize the theoretical tenets that support the use of these strategies, including knowledge organization, and development of illness scripts. We then provide a detailed description of the key components of each strategy, emphasizing the practical applications of each one by sharing specific examples. We also explore the potential for a combined application of these strategies in a longitudinal and developmental approach to teaching clinical reasoning at the undergraduate level. Finally, we discuss enablers and barriers in the implementation and integration of these teaching strategies while taking into consideration curricular needs, context, and resources. We are aware that many strategies exist and are not arguing that SE, CReSME, and DR are the most effective ones or the only ones to be adopted. Nevertheless, we selected these strategies because of overarching theoretical principles, empirical evidence supporting their use, and our own experience with them. We are hoping to provide practical advice on the implementation of these strategies to practicing educators who aim at developing an integrated approach to the teaching of clinical reasoning to medical students at different stages of their development.

Clinical Reasoning Learning Sessions in COVID 19 Pandemic

Clinical reasoning teaching is an approach educational method based on learning and contextualized and synthesis education. The aim of this study was to determine the value of clinical reasoning teaching sessions, from the perspective of third year medical students using a self-administered questionnaire. One group of ten students participated in this study. They had clinical case sessions during three weeks. An anonymous evaluation self-administered questionnaire was submitted to the students at the end of the period. The average scores given by students for the items “quality of education”, “atmosphere”, “interest in teaching sessions” and “acquisition of new clinical knowledge” were greater than 7/10. All students opted for clinical reasoning teaching as the preferred teaching method for optimal memorization and have found a real contribution of reasoning teaching in the management of relationship with the patient. Clinical reasoning teaching session appears to be widely desired by medical students.

Virtual Wards: A Rapid Adaptation to Clinical Attachments in MBChB During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

When the COVID-19 pandemic suddenly prevented medical students from attending their clinical attachments, the faculty involved in the third year of medical school (MBChB3) at the University of Glasgow created Virtual Wards. The focus of the Virtual Wards was to continue teaching of clinical reasoning remotely whilst COVID-19 restrictions were in place. Virtual Wards were mapped to the common and important presentations and conditions and provided opportunity for history-taking, clinical examination skills, requesting investigations, interpreting results, diagnosis and management. The Virtual Wards were successful, and further wards were developed the following academic year for MBChB4 students. This chapter describes the theoretical underpinnings of the Virtual Wards and the technological considerations, followed by a description of the Wards themselves. We then analyse an evaluation of the Virtual Wards and provide both a faculty and student perspective. Throughout the chapter, we provide tips for educators developing Virtual Ward environments.

Why is it so difficult to implement a longitudinal clinical reasoning curriculum? A multicenter interview study on the barriers perceived by European health professions educators

BackgroundEffective clinical reasoning is a core competency of health professionals that is necessary to assure patients’ safety. Unfortunately, adoption of longitudinal clinical reasoning curricula is still infrequent. This study explores the barriers that hinder the explicit teaching of clinical reasoning from a new international perspective.MethodsThe context of this study was a European project whose aim is to develop a longitudinal clinical reasoning curriculum. We collected data in semi-structured interviews with responders from several European countries who represent various health professions and have different backgrounds, roles and experience. We performed a qualitative content analysis of the gathered data and constructed a coding frame using a combined deductive/inductive approach. The identified themes were validated by parallel coding and in group discussions among project members.ResultsA total of 29 respondents from five European countries participated in the interviews; the majority of them represent medicine and nursing sciences. We grouped the identified barriers into eight general themes: Time, Culture, Motivation, Clinical Reasoning as a Concept, Teaching, Assessment, Infrastructure and Others. Subthemes included issues with discussing errors and providing feedback, awareness of clinical reasoning teaching methods, and tensions between the groups of professionals involved.ConclusionsThis study provides an in-depth analysis of the barriers that hinder the teaching of explicit clinical reasoning. The opinions are presented from the perspective of several European higher education institutions. The identified barriers are complex and should be treated holistically due to the many interconnections between the identified barriers. Progress in implementation is hampered by the presence of reciprocal causal chains that aggravate this situation. Further research could investigate the perceptual differences between health professions regarding the barriers to clinical reasoning. The collected insights on the complexity and diversity of these barriers will help when rolling out a long-term agenda for overcoming the factors that inhibit the implementation of clinical reasoning curricula.

Clinical Reasoning Needs to Be Explicitly Addressed in Health Professions Curricula: Recommendations from a European Consortium.

Clinical reasoning entails the application of knowledge and skills to collect and integrate information, typically with the goal of arriving at a diagnosis and management plan based on the patient’s unique circumstances and preferences. Evidence-informed, structured, and explicit teaching and assessment of clinical reasoning in educational programs of medical and other health professions remain unmet needs. We herein summarize recommendations for clinical reasoning learning objectives (LOs), as derived from a consensus approach among European and US researchers and health professions educators. A four-step consensus approach was followed: (1) identification of a convenience sample of the most relevant and applied national LO catalogues for health professions educational programs (N = 9) from European and US countries, (2) extraction of LOs related to clinical reasoning and translation into English, (3) mapping of LOs into predefined categories developed within the Erasmus+ Developing, implementing, and disseminating an adaptive clinical reasoning curriculum for healthcare students and educators (DID-ACT) consortium, and (4) synthesis of analysis findings into recommendations for how LOs related to clinical reasoning could be presented and incorporated in LO catalogues, upon consensus. Three distinct recommendations were formulated: (1) make clinical reasoning explicit, (2) emphasize interprofessional and collaboration aspects of clinical reasoning, and (3) include aspects of teaching and assessment of clinical reasoning. In addition, the consortium understood that implementation of bilingual catalogues with English as a common language might contribute to lower heterogeneity regarding amount, structure, and level of granularity of clinical reasoning LOs across countries. These recommendations will hopefully motivate and guide initiatives towards the implementation of LOs related to clinical reasoning in existing and future LO catalogues.

Training the Next Generation of Pediatrician-Advocates: A New Focus on the Inpatient Setting.

Training the Next Generation of Pediatrician-Advocates: A New Focus on the Inpatient Setting.