ArticleJournal of Taibah University Medical Sciences2023
Clinical reasoning training sessions for health educators-A scoping review.
Article in Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assisting the Learning of Clinical Reasoning by Veterinary Medical Learners with a Case Example.Veterinary sciences · 2024Review
- Effectiveness of a Specialty-Focused, Outpatient-Based Case Teaching Model in Residency Training for Metabolic Dysfunction-Associated Steatotic Liver Disease.Journal of medical education and curricular developmentArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Clinical reasoning (CR) is important in health professions, because it ensures patient safety and decreases morbidity. CR should be introduced early in medical school. Health educators play a major role in advocating for the use of CR among students; however, educators themselves can be a barrier to the incorporation of CR; consequently, CR training sessions for educators have been proposed as a potential solution. This scoping review was conducted to highlight studies on CR training among health educators. Methods: A scoping review was performed to identify studies on CR training sessions for health educators. PubMed, SciVerse Scopus, Web of Science Core Collection, EBSCO Medline Complete and ERIC databases were searched with terms including clinical reasoning, diagnostic reasoning, teacher and trainer, to identify articles published between 1991 and 2021. Results: The initial search yielded 6587 articles; after careful selection, n = 12 articles were included in this scoping review. Most CR training sessions were in the medical field, were conducted in North America, and involved clinical educators. The sessions focused on the fundamentals and steps of CR; biases and debiasing strategies; and learners' difficulties with various teaching formats, such as didactic presentations, facilitated small group sessions with case discussions, roleplay, and use of tools and a mobile application. Educators and students had positive perceptions regarding the conduct and effectiveness of the training sessions. Conclusions: These training sessions were rated highly; however, longitudinal feedback regarding the application of learnt CR teaching strategies is necessary.
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.