Search

Objective General guidelines for teaching clinical reasoning have received much attention, despite a paucity of instructional approaches with demonstrated effectiveness. As suggested in a recent experimental study, self-explanation while solving clinical cases may be an effective strategy to foster reasoning in clinical clerks dealing with less familiar cases. However, the mechanisms that mediate this benefit have not been specifically investigated. The aim of this study was to explore the types of knowledge used by students when solving familiar and less familiar clinical cases with self-explanation. Methods In a previous study, 36 third-year medical students diagnosed familiar and less familiar clinical cases either by engaging in self-explanation or not. Based on an analysis of previously collected data, the present study compared the content of self-explanation protocols generated by seven randomly selected students while solving four familiar and four less familiar cases. In total, 56 verbal protocols (28 familiar and 28 less familiar) were segmented and coded using the following categories: paraphrases, biomedical inferences, clinical inferences, monitoring statements and errors. Results Students provided more self-explanation segments from less familiar cases ( M = 275.29) than from familiar cases ( M = 248.71, p = 0.046). They provided significantly more paraphrases (p = 0.001) and made more errors (p = 0.008). A significant interaction was found between familiarity and the type of inferences (biomedical versus clinical, p = 0.016). When self-explaining less familiar cases, students provided significantly more biomedical inferences than familiar cases. Conclusions Lack of familiarity with a case seems to stimulate medical students to engage in more extensive thinking during self-explanation. Less familiar cases seem to activate students' biomedical knowledge, which in turn helps them to create new links between biomedical and clinical knowledge, and eventually construct a more coherent mental representation of diseases. This may clarify the previously found positive effect that self-explanation has on the diagnosis of unfamiliar cases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Medical Education 2011: : 688-695 Skill in clinical reasoning is a highly valued attribute of doctors, but instructional approaches to foster medical students' clinical reasoning skills remain scarce. Self-explanation is an instructional procedure, the positive effects of which on learning have been demonstrated in a variety of domains, but which remain largely unexplored in medical education. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of self-explanation on students' learning of clinical reasoning during clerkships and to examine whether these effects are affected by topic familiarity. An experimental study with a training phase and an assessment phase was conducted with 36 Year 3 medical students, randomly assigned to one of two groups. In the training phase, students solved 12 clinical cases (four cases on a less familiar topic; four on a more familiar topic; four on filler topics), either generating self-explanations ( n = 18) or not ( n = 18). The self-explanations were generated after minimal instructions and no feedback was provided to students. One week later, in the assessment phase, students were requested to diagnose 12 different, more difficult cases, similarly distributed among the same more familiar topic, less familiar topic and filler topics, and their diagnostic performance was assessed. In the training phase the performance of the two groups did not differ. However, in the assessment phase 1 week later, a significant interaction was found between self-explanation and case topic familiarity ( F = 6.18, p < 0.05). Students in the self-explanation condition, compared with those in the control condition, demonstrated better diagnostic performance on subsequent clinical cases, but this effect emerged only for cases concerning the less familiar topic. The present study shows the beneficial influence of generating self-explanations when dealing with less familiar clinical contexts. Generating self-explanations without feedback resulted in better diagnostic performance than in the control group at 1 week after the intervention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]