Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35055758›Full record

SynthesisInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022

Evaluating the Clinical Reasoning of Student Health Professionals in Placement and Simulation Settings: A Systematic Review.

Jennie Brentnall, Debbie Thackray, Belinda Judd

Registry-linked trialAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07660770 (The Effect of Scenario-Based Simulation Training for Adolescent Leukemia Care on Nursing Students' Perceived Stress, Knowledge, and Learning Satisfaction), which is not on this map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT07660770 naactive not recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

The Effect of Scenario-Based Simulation Training for Adolescent Leukemia Care on Nursing Students' Perceived Stress, Knowledge, and Learning Satisfaction: A Mixed-Methods Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorAtılım UniversityRan2026 to 2026Enrolled18ConditionsNursing Education, Simulation Training, Stress, Psychological, LeukemiaArmsScenario-Based Simulation Training
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Can Serious Games Be Used in Teaching Clinical Reasoning to Nursing Students?Journal of advances in medical education & professionalism · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Jennie BrentnallWork Integrated Learning, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia.
Debbie ThackrayPhysiotherapy, School of Health Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton SO17 1BJ, UK.
Belinda JuddWork Integrated Learning, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6640-269X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

(1) Background: Clinical reasoning is essential to the effective practice of autonomous health professionals and is, therefore, an essential capability to develop as students. This review aimed to systematically identify the tools available to health professional educators to evaluate students' attainment of clinical reasoning capabilities in clinical placement and simulation settings. (2) Methods: A systemic review of seven databases was undertaken. Peer-reviewed, English-language publications reporting studies that developed or tested relevant tools were included. Searches included multiple terms related to clinical reasoning and health disciplines. Data regarding each tool's conceptual basis and evaluated constructs were systematically extracted and analysed. (3) Results: Most of the 61 included papers evaluated students in medical and nursing disciplines, and over half reported on the Script Concordance Test or Lasater Clinical Judgement Rubric. A number of conceptual frameworks were referenced, though many papers did not reference any framework. (4) Conclusions: Overall, key outcomes highlighted an emphasis on diagnostic reasoning, as opposed to management reasoning. Tools were predominantly aligned with individual health disciplines and with limited cross-referencing within the field. Future research into clinical reasoning evaluation tools should build on and refer to existing approaches and consider contributions across professional disciplinary divides.

Indexed as

Clinical ReasoningStudents, NursingClinical CompetenceHealth PersonnelHumansStudentsallied healthassessment and evaluationclinical reasoningmedicinenursingstudents

Identifiers

PMID35055758
PMCPMC8775520

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.