ArticleMedEdPORTAL : the journal of teaching and learning resources2018
Clinical Reasoning in the Primary Care Setting: Two Scenario-Based Simulations for Residents and Attendings.
Article in MedEdPORTAL : the journal of teaching and learning resources, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Context factors in clinical decision-making: a scoping review.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025Article
- I Don't Have a Diagnosis for You: Preparing Medical Students to Communicate Diagnostic Uncertainty in the Emergency Department.MedEdPORTAL : the journal of teaching and learning resources · 2022Article
- The importance of theory and method: A brief reflection on an innovative program of research examining how situational factors influence physicians' clinical reasoning.FASEB bioAdvances · 2021Article
- Clinical Reasoning in the Ward Setting: A Rapid Response Scenario for Residents and Attendings.MedEdPORTAL : the journal of teaching and learning resources · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: We describe the development and implementation of tools medical educators or researchers can use for developing or analyzing residents' through attending physicians' clinical reasoning in an outpatient clinic setting. The resource includes two scenario-based simulations (i.e., diabetes, angina), implementation support materials, an open-ended postencounter form, and a think-aloud reflection protocol. Method: We designed two scenarios with potential case ambiguity and contextual factors to add complexity for studying clinical reasoning. The scenarios are designed to be used prior to an open-ended written exercise and a think-aloud reflection to elicit reasoning and reflection. We report on their implementation in a research context but developed them to be used in both educational and research settings. Results: Twelve physicians (five interns, three residents, and four attendings) considered between three and six differential diagnoses ( Discussion: The potential case content ambiguity, along with the contextual factors (e.g., patient suggesting alternative diagnoses), provides a complex environment in which to explore or teach clinical reasoning.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.