Search

Society expects physicians to always improve their competencies and to be up to date with developments in their field. Therefore, an important aim of medical schools is to educate future medical doctors to become self-regulated, lifelong learners. However, it is unclear if medical students become better self-regulated learners during the pre-clinical stage of medical school, and whether students develop self-regulated learning skills differently, dependent on the educational approach of their medical school. In a cross-sectional design, we investigated the development of 384 medical students' self-regulated learning skills with the use of the Self-Regulation of Learning Self-Report Scale. Next, we compared this development in students who enrolled in two distinct medical curricula: a problem-based curriculum and a lectured-based curriculum. Analysis showed that more skills decreased than increased during the pre-clinical stage of medical school, and that the difference between the curricula was mainly caused by a decrease in the skill evaluation in the lecture-based curriculum. These findings seem to suggest that, irrespective of the curriculum, self-regulated learning skills do not develop during medical school. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Medical Education 2012: 46: 464-472 Objectives Developing diagnostic competence in students is a major goal of medical education, but there is little empirical evidence on instructional strategies that foster the acquisition of this competence. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of structured reflection compared with the generation of immediate or differential diagnosis while practising with clinical cases on learning clinical diagnosis. Methods This was a three-phase experimental study. During a learning phase, 46 Year 4 students diagnosed six clinical cases under different experimental conditions: structured reflection, immediate diagnosis, or differential diagnosis. This was followed by an immediate test and a delayed test administered 1 week later. Each test consisted of diagnosing four different cases of diseases presented in the learning phase. Performance in diagnosing these new cases was used as a measure of learning. Results Repeated-measures analysis of variance on the mean diagnostic accuracy scores (range: 0-1) showed a significant interaction between performance moment (i.e. performance in the learning phase and on each test) and instructions followed during the learning phase (p = 0.003). Follow-up analyses of this interaction showed that diagnostic performance did not differ between conditions in the learning phase. On the immediate test, scores in the reflection condition (mean = 0.48, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.38-0.58) were significantly lower than scores in the differential diagnosis condition (mean = 0.62, 95% CI 0.54-0.70; p = 0.012) and marginally lower than those in the immediate diagnosis condition (mean = 0.61, 95% CI 0.52-0.70; p = 0.04). One week later, however, scores in the reflection condition (mean = 0.66, 95% CI 0.56-0.76) significantly outperformed those in the other conditions (differential diagnosis: mean = 0.48, 95% CI 0.37-0.58 [p < 0.01]; immediate diagnosis: mean = 0.52, 95% CI 0.43-0.60 [p = 0.01]). Comparisons within experimental conditions showed that performance from the immediate to the delayed test decreased in the immediate and differential diagnosis conditions (immediate diagnosis: p = 0.042; differential diagnosis: p = 0.012), but increased in the reflection condition (p = 0.003). Conclusions Structured reflection while practising with cases appears to foster the learning of clinical knowledge more effectively than the generation of immediate or differential diagnoses and therefore seems to be an effective instructional approach to developing diagnostic competence in students. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context Two modes of case processing have been shown to underlie diagnostic judgements: analytical and non-analytical reasoning. An optimal form of clinical reasoning is suggested to combine both modes. Conditions leading doctors to shift from the usual mode of non-analytical reasoning to reflective reasoning have not been identified. This paper reports a study aimed at exploring these conditions by investigating the effects of ambiguity of clinical cases on clinical reasoning. Methods Participants were 16 internal medicine residents in the Brazilian state of Ceará. They were asked to diagnose 20 clinical cases and recall case information. The independent variable was the degree of ambiguity of clinical cases, with 2 levels: straightforward (i.e. non-ambiguous) and ambiguous. Dependent variables were processing time, diagnostic accuracy and proposition per category recalled. Data were analysed using a repeated measures design. Results Participants processed straightforward cases faster and more accurately than ambiguous ones. The proportion of text propositions recalled was significantly lower ( t[15] = 2.29, P = 0.037) in ambiguous cases, and an interaction effect between case version and proposition category was also found ( F[5, 75] = 4.52, P = 0.001, d = 0.232, observed power = 0.962). Furthermore, participants recalled significantly more literal propositions from the ambiguous cases than from the straightforward cases ( t[15] = 2.28, P = 0.037). Conclusions Ambiguity of clinical cases was shown to lead residents to switch from automatic to reflective reasoning, as indicated by longer processing time, and more literal propositions recalled in ambiguous cases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: While diagnosing problems, physicians frequently switch from nonanalytical to reflective reasoning. The conditions inducing doctors to reflect are largely unknown. The authors investigated whether a shift to reflection occurs when physicians perceive a case as problematic, and its effects on diagnostic accuracy., Method: The authors conducted two within-subjects experiments in Brazilian teaching hospitals in 2007. In Experiment 1, 20 medical residents diagnosed the same 10 clinical cases under two experimental conditions: a nonproblematic versus a problematic context. (The latter was created by informing participants that other physicians failed to diagnose the case previously.) In addition, participants judged whether a set of medical concepts were related to the case, and response time was measured. In Experiment 2, 18 residents diagnosed two cases while thinking aloud. The authors hypothesized that a case perceived as problematic would trigger reflection, leading to higher diagnostic accuracy, lower response times for recognizing concepts (Experiment 1), more time for diagnosing, and more elaborate think-aloud protocols (Experiment 2)., Results: Experiment 1: Accuracy of diagnosis was significantly higher within the problematic context, and participants were faster in deciding whether concepts were related to the case. The same cases were evaluated as more complex and less frequently seen. Experiment 2: Time spent on diagnosis, memory for case findings, and inferences derived from the cases were significantly higher within the problematic context., Conclusions: A context perceived as problematic induced reflection in the participating clinicians, as indicated by lower response times, more time spent on diagnosis, and more elaborate protocols. Reflective reasoning comprised more careful analysis of findings and alternative diagnoses, and increased diagnostic accuracy.