Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42788646›Full record

ReviewJournal of evaluation in clinical practice2026

Self, Others and Context: Reframing Clinical Reasoning as a Socio-Cognitive Practice.

Thierry Pelaccia, Peter Wyer, Jonathan Sherbino, Geoff Norman

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of evaluation in clinical practice, 2026. 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
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.

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

4 authors.

Thierry PelacciaPrehospital Emergency Care Service (SAMU 67), Strasbourg University Hospital, Strasbourg, France.ORCID 0000-0002-0396-5428
Peter WyerDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, New York, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1447-7945
Jonathan SherbinoMcMaster Health Education Research, Innovation and Theory (MERIT) Research Centre, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Geoff NormanMcMaster Health Education Research, Innovation and Theory (MERIT) Research Centre, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-1053-7998

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

RATIONALE, AIMS AND

objectivesClinical reasoning is often studied as if it occurred inside the clinician's head. Yet, in practice, clinicians think, decide and act through constant interaction with patients, colleagues, technologies, routines and local constraints. This article challenges predominantly individual and decontextualised accounts of clinical reasoning and reframes reasoning as a situated socio-cognitive practice. We aim to show how explicit and tacit knowledge interact with the social, material and organizational environments in which clinical practice unfolds.

methodsWe develop a conceptual synthesis drawing on research in clinical reasoning, situated and distributed cognition, ecological psychology, workplace learning and knowledge translation. Tacit knowledge, particularly know-how and know-who, is used as a bridge between individual cognitive processes and the healthcare ecosystem. Distributed cognition, affordances, communities of practice and mindlines are mobilised as complementary analytical lenses.

resultsThis synthesis conceptualises clinical reasoning as an emergent capability arising from interactions among Self, Others and Context. Expertise depends not only on what clinicians know, but also on their ability to perceive what matters, mobilise the right resources, judge whom to trust, and adapt action to the situation at hand. This perspective helps explain why expert performance may deteriorate across unfamiliar settings and why artificial intelligence should be understood not as a substitute for reasoning, but as a cognitive artefact whose value depends on clinicians' capacity to critically interpret and contextualise its outputs. It also highlights the importance of authentic participation, cognitive apprenticeship and socially supported reflection in developing clinical expertise.

conclusionsClinical reasoning is neither an isolated mental process nor a simple response to context. It is an accomplishment distributed across clinicians, other people, artefacts and environments. Reframing it in this way shifts attention from how clinicians think in isolation to how reasoning actually works in practice, with important implications for clinical work, education, artificial intelligence and research.

Indexed as

Clinical ReasoningCognitionArtificial IntelligenceClinical CompetenceHumansartificial intelligenceclinical reasoningcognitionmedical education

Identifiers

PMID42788646
PMCPMC13614000

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.