Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39376810›Full record

ArticleCureus2024

Clinical Reasoning Skills Among Second-Phase Medical Students in West Bengal, India: An Exploratory Study.

Diptakanti Mukhopadhyay, Sonali G Choudhari

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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.

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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Medical reasoning in LLMs: an in-depth analysis of DeepSeek R1.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2025
    Article
  2. Review
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

2 authors.

Diptakanti MukhopadhyayCommunity Medicine, College of Medicine & Sagore Dutta Hospital, Kolkata, IND.
Sonali G ChoudhariCommunity Medicine, School of Epidemiology and Public Health, Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College, Datta Meghe Institute of Higher Education & Research, Wardha, IND.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction Proper application of clinical reasoning skills is essential to reduce diagnostic and management errors. Explicit inclusion of training and assessment of clinical reasoning skills is the demand of time. The study intended to measure the clinical reasoning skills of second-phase undergraduate students in a medical college in West Bengal, India, and its distribution across several individual variables. Methods The clinical reasoning skills of 105 undergraduate medical students were assessed in a cross-sectional exploratory study using key feature questions (KFQs) with the partial credit scoring system. Six case vignettes aligned to the core competencies in the subject of pharmacology, pathology, and microbiology were designed and validated by the subject material experts for this purpose. The responses of the participants were collected through Google Forms (Google, Mountain View, CA) after obtaining written informed consent. The scores obtained in all KFQs were added and expressed in percentage of the maximum attainable score. Results The mean (±SD) clinical reasoning score of the participants was 42.5 (±12.6). Only 29.6% of respondents scored ≥ 50. Students with higher subjective economic status (p-value = 0.01) and perceived autonomy (p-value < 0.001) were more likely to have higher clinical reasoning scores. The marks obtained in previous summative examinations were significantly correlated with clinical reasoning scores. Conclusion Average score < 50.0 and inability to score ≥ 50.0 by more than two-thirds of the participants reflected the deficit in the clinical reasoning skills of second-phase MBBS students. The association of clinical reasoning skills with economic status, autonomy, and previous academic performances needs further exploration.

Indexed as

clinical case managementdiagnostic skillskey feature questionsmedical student assessmentundergraduate medical education

Identifiers

PMID39376810
PMCPMC11456746

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.