Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40468494›Full record

ArticleKorean journal of medical education2025

Facilitating clinical reasoning for medical students in clinical settings: a scoping review.

Yeny Dyah Cahyaningrum, Yoyo Suhoyo, Gandes Retno Rahayu

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Korean journal of medical education, 2025. 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. Article
  2. 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.

Yeny Dyah CahyaningrumDepartment of Medical Education, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Islam Indonesia, Yogyakarta, Indonesia.
Yoyo SuhoyoDepartment of Medical Education and Bioethics, Faculty of Medicine, Public Health and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia.
Gandes Retno RahayuDepartment of Medical Education and Bioethics, Faculty of Medicine, Public Health and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia.

Funding

Universitas Gajah Mada 5075/UNI.P.II/Dit-Lit/PT.01.01/2023
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This scoping review describes the responsibilities of facilitators, especially clinical teachers, in facilitating clinical reasoning and factors affecting the implementation of the strategies. This review was conducted by collecting and identifying original data in peer-reviewed full English journals published between 2004 and 2021. It followed Arksey and O'Malley's framework and adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. The process included formulating review questions, developing a comprehensive search strategy, selecting relevant studies, extracting data, and presenting findings. Initial searches were conducted on PubMed, EBSCO, Scopus, and EMBASE, with a research librarian ensuring the efficiency and comprehensiveness of the search. The search based on the PCC approach (population, concept, context approach) encompassed "clinical reasoning," "facilitation," and "clinical teachers." Out of the initial 2,004 records retrieved from the four databases, a thorough screening process led to the 30 studies included in the review, revealing three primary themes and multiple strategies related to clinical reasoning facilitation in clinical settings. These themes involved the responsibilities of clinical teachers, strategies utilized, and factors influencing clinical reasoning learning in clinical settings. In the clinical settings, clinical teachers have crucial responsibilities in facilitating clinical reasoning learning, including creating a safe environment, demonstrating effective practices, using appropriate strategies, and assessing students' abilities. While this review has explored the responsibilities of clinical teachers, specific strategies that enhance clinical reasoning abilities need further investigation. Additionally, the impacts of identified factors on strengthening clinical reasoning abilities require more analysis.

Indexed as

Clinical CompetenceClinical ReasoningEducation, MedicalEducation, Medical, UndergraduateFaculty, MedicalStudents, MedicalHumansLearningClinical reasoningCognitionCritical thinkingMedical students

Identifiers

PMID40468494
PMCPMC12149753

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.