Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38650827›Full record

ArticleQatar medical journal2024

Perceived opportunities of clinical reasoning learning in postgraduate psychiatry training: Trainees' and faculty's perspectives.

Dalia Albahari

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Qatar medical journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 94% of its field
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Dalia AlbahariHamad Medical Corporation, Doha, Qatar Email: dalbahari@hamad.qa.
Hamad Medical Corporation · QA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLearning clinical reasoning is less effective in isolation of clinical environments because contextual factors are a significant component in the clinical reasoning process. This study investigated the differences in opinions between novice and expert clinicians on learning clinical reasoning in the workplace. MATERIALS AND

methodsThe author used a cross-sectional online survey design to investigate the perceived learning of six clinical reasoning skills in 13 learning opportunities. Questionnaires were emailed to 41 postgraduate psychiatry trainee doctors and 37 faculty members. Data were analyzed descriptively. The Chi-square test was used to compare the responses of the two groups. Statistical significance was set at

resultsThe combined response rate was 73.07%. The two groups perceived the learning of advanced clinical reasoning skills to be lower than that of basic skills. There were significant differences in the perceived learning of basic clinical reasoning skills in self-study/exam preparations (

conclusionsThe trainees showed a significant preference for structured learning environments rather than clinical environments, especially for advanced clinical reasoning skills. Trainees likely struggled with cognitive overload in clinical environments. Local postgraduate psychiatry programs will likely benefit from implementing multiple educational interventions that facilitate teaching and learning clinical reasoning in complex clinical environments.

Indexed as

clinical reasoningfacultypsychiatry clinical fellowshippsychiatry residency

Identifiers

PMID38650827
PMCPMC11034381
OpenAlexW4395082843

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.