暂无摘要。

UNASSIGNED: The development of critical thinking (CT) has been a universal goal in higher education. A systematic review of the literature was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of currently used pedagogical practices to foster CT/ clinical reasoning (CR)/ clinical judgment (CJ) skills and/or dispositions in undergraduate medical students.
UNASSIGNED: PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus databases were searched from January 2010 to April 2021 with a predefined Boolean expression.
UNASSIGNED: Of the 3221 articles originally identified, 33 articles were included by using PICOS methodology. From these, 21 (64%) reported CR pedagogical practices and 12 (36%) CT pedagogical practices.
UNASSIGNED: Overall, pedagogical practices such as cognitive/visual representation, simulation, literature exposure, test-enhancing and team-based learning, clinical case discussion, error-based learning, game-based learning seem to enhance CT/CR skills and/or dispositions. Further research is required to identify the optimal timing, duration and modality of pedagogical interventions for effectively foster CT/CR in medical education.

Clinical reasoning is an essential component of nursing. It has emerged as a concept that integrates the core competencies of quality and safety education for nurses. In cooperation with five European partners, Instituto Politécnico de Setúbal (IPS) realized the \"Clinical Reasoning in Nursing and Midwifery Education and Practice\" project as part of the Erasmus+ project. As a partner, our team designed a multiplier event-the student training course. The aim of this report is to describe the construction and development of this clinical reasoning training course for nursing students. We outline the pedagogical approach of an undergraduate training course on clinical reasoning in 2023, which we separated into four stages: (i) welcoming, (ii) knowledge exploration, (iii) pedagogical learning, and (iv) sharing experience. This paper presents the learning outcomes of the collaborative reflection on and integration of the clinical reasoning concept among nursing students. This educational experience fostered reflection and discussion within the teaching team of the nursing department regarding the concept, models, and teaching/learning methods for clinical reasoning, with the explicit inclusion of clinical reasoning content in the nursing curriculum. We highlight the importance of implementing long-term pedagogical strategies in nursing education.

BACKGROUND: There is a discussion among general practitioners and psychiatrists regarding over-diagnosing versus under-reporting of psychiatric diagnoses. A deeper understanding of this topic is relevant for providing reasonable health care and for planning future studies. A crucial factor to understanding this discussion is the difference in the prevalence of a disease in each sector. One way to attain knowledge about such prevalences is the analysis of routine care data of the sector in question. However, diagnosis-related data might be modified by several additional influencing factors.
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to explore what kind of motives and modifying factors play a role for or against giving psychiatric diagnoses in psychiatric and general medical settings.
METHODS: Twenty-six semi-structured interviews were conducted with German physicians in the fields of general medicine and psychiatry. Interviews were analysed using content analysis.
RESULTS: The analysis revealed three major motivational categories for finding a diagnosis: (1) \"objective matters\" such as \"categorisation for research\"; (2) \"functional and performance-related factors\" such as \"requirement for medication\", \"billing aspects\" that go with certain diagnoses or \"access to adequate care\" and (3) \"Individual factors\" such as the \"personality of a physician\". Similarly, factors emerged that lead to not making psychiatric diagnoses like \"fear of stigmatization among patients\" or \"detrimental insurance status with psychiatric diagnosis\". Additionally participants mentioned other reasons for \"not diagnosing a psychiatric diagnosis\", such as \"coding of other clinical pictures\".
CONCLUSIONS: The diagnostic process is a complex phenomenon that goes far beyond the identification of medical findings. This insight should be considered when processing and interpreting secondary data for designing health care systems or designing a study.

BACKGROUND: The consensus that clinical reasoning should be explicitly addressed throughout medical training is increasing; however, studies on specific teaching methods, particularly, for preclinical students, are lacking. This study investigated the effects of an illness script worksheet approach in flipped learning on the development of clinical reasoning abilities in preclinical students. It also explored whether the impact of this intervention differed depending on clinical reasoning ability after dividing the students into high and low groups based on their pre-diagnostic thinking inventory (DTI) scores.
METHODS: This study used a one-group pre-post test design and convenience sampling. Forty-two second-year medical students were invited to participate in this study. The course, \"clinical reasoning method,\" was redesigned as an illness script worksheet approach in flipped learning. The course was an eight-week long program. The students met once or twice per week with a different professor each time and engaged with 15 clinical cases in small groups in one classroom. Each time, one professor facilitated seven groups in a single classroom. The effectiveness of the intervention was measured using DTI before and after the intervention. A learning experience survey was conducted with post-DTI assessment.
RESULTS: Thirty-six students participated in the survey and their data were analyzed. The mean pre-DTI score was 170.4, and the mean post-DTI score was 185.2, indicating an 8.68% increase (p < .001). Significant differences were also found in both high and low groups between the pre- and post-DTI assessments. However, the low group improved much more than the high group and exhibited a significant increase in one of the DTI subscales as well. The overall average score on the learning experience survey was 3.11 out of 4.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings indicated that the intervention was an effective instructional method for the development of clinical reasoning in preclinical students and was more beneficial for students with a low level of clinical reasoning ability. This study demonstrated that the intervention can be a feasible and scalable method to effectively and efficiently train clinical reasoning in preclinical students in a classroom.

Diagnostic errors are prevalent in critical care practice and are associated with patient harm and costs for providers and the healthcare system. Patient complexity, illness severity, and the urgency in initiating proper treatment all contribute to decision-making errors. Clinician-related factors such as fatigue, cognitive overload, and inexperience further interfere with effective decision-making. Cognitive science has provided insight into the clinical decision-making process that can be used to reduce error. This evidence-based review discusses ten common misconceptions regarding critical care decision-making. By understanding how practitioners make clinical decisions and examining how errors occur, strategies may be developed and implemented to decrease errors in Decision-making and improve patient outcomes.

Healthcare discriminations based on one\'s ethnic background is increasingly being studied in medicine. The scale of the Covid-19 pandemic has played an important role in bringing them to light. Data, although scarce, exist in France. These discriminations have an impact on the care pathway and contribute to the renunciation of care by the most affected populations. The issue of discrimination is particularly relevant in infectious diseases. Although the epidemiology of infectious diseases is unevenly distributed worldwide, erroneous social representations are prevalent and expose to a harmful prejudice against migrants with regard to infectious diseases. The transmissible nature of some infectious diseases reinforces their stigmatizing potential. In this context, it seems important to discuss the dimension to be given to social determinants, geographical origin, phenotype, and ethnicity in teaching and medical reasoning. The English-speaking world uses the concept of \"race\" in a structural way, whereas this \"international standard\" has not been applied in France until now. To improve the care of people from minority groups, it seems important to better document and teach a more nuanced clinical reasoning based on origin, without neglecting the importance of collecting and taking into account social determinants of health and environmental factors.

BACKGROUND: Clinical reasoning (CR) is a crucial ability that can prevent errors in patient care. Despite its important role, CR is often not taught explicitly and, even when it is taught, typically not all aspects of this ability are addressed in health professions education. Recent research has shown the need for explicit teaching of CR for both students and teachers. To further develop the teaching and learning of CR we need to improve the understanding of students\' and teachers\' needs regarding content as well as teaching and assessment methods for a student and trainer CR curriculum.
METHODS: Parallel mixed-methods design that used web-surveys and semi-structured interviews to gather data from both students (nsurvey = 100; ninterviews = 13) and teachers (nsurvey = 112; ninterviews = 28). The interviews and surveys contained similar questions to allow for triangulation of the results. This study was conducted as part of the EU-funded project DID-ACT ( https://did-act.eu ).
RESULTS: Both the surveys and interview data emphasized the need for content in a clinical reasoning (CR) curriculum such as \"gathering, interpreting and synthesizing patient information\", \"generating differential diagnoses\", \"developing a diagnostic and a treatment plan\" and \"collaborative and interprofessional aspects of CR\". There was high agreement that case-based learning and simulations are most useful for teaching CR. Clinical and oral examinations were favored for the assessment of CR. The preferred format for a train-the-trainer (TTT)-course was blended learning. There was also some agreement between the survey and interview participants regarding contents of a TTT-course (e.g. teaching and assessment methods for CR). The interviewees placed special importance on interprofessional aspects also for the TTT-course.
CONCLUSIONS: We found some consensus on needed content, teaching and assessment methods for a student and TTT-course in CR. Future research could investigate the effects of CR curricula on desired outcomes, such as patient care.

OBJECTIVE: To validate the content of the Speech-Language Pathology Concordance Test called FonoTCS.
METHODS: This is a content validation study of the instrument. Five speech-language pathologists, all with doctoral degrees and teaching experience, averaging 24.8 years of professional practice, participated in the development of FonoTCS and reached a consensus during the process. Thirty questions and 120 items were created, covering seven areas of speech-language pathology expertise across three domains. For content validation, FonoTCS was electronically sent to 15 evaluators to respond to a questionnaire with five questions, rated on a five-point scale, regarding the criteria of clarity, ethics, and relevance of the questions. The Corrected Content Validity Coefficient was calculated for all statements to analyze the responses. Questions with agreement percentages equal to or less than 80% were revised.
RESULTS: Thirteen evaluators, all female, with an average age of 39.07 years, including eight with master\'s degrees and five with doctoral degrees, and an average clinical practice experience of 15.38 years, participated in the analysis. The average Corrected Content Validity Coefficient values for the clarity criterion were 0.93 and 0.95, for the relevance criterion 0.98 and 0.92, and for the ethics criterion 0.99. Two questions received scores of 0.78 and 0.80, both related to the audiology area in the assessment/diagnosis domain, specifically question 2 regarding the relevance criterion. These questions were reviewed and restructured by the judges.
CONCLUSIONS: FonoTCS is a valid instrument from a content perspective.
OBJECTIVE: validar o conteúdo do Teste de Concordância de Scripts em Fonoaudiologia, denominado FonoTCS.
UNASSIGNED: Trata-se de estudo de validação de conteúdo de instrumento. Participaram da construção do FonoTCS cinco fonoaudiólogas, doutoras e docentes, com média de 24,8 anos de atuação profissional, que chegaram a um consenso durante o processo de construção do teste. Elaborou-se 30 questões e 120 itens contemplando as áreas de atuação fonoaudiológica. Em seguida, 15 fonoaudiólogas com titulação mínima de mestre, e com, no mínimo, 10 anos de atuação clínica generalista receberam eletronicamente o FonoTCS para validação de conteúdo por meio de questionário sobre critérios de clareza, ética e pertinência do conteúdo das questões. Para a análise das respostas calculou-se o Coeficiente de Validade de Conteúdo Corrigido de todas as afirmativas. Foram revisadas as questões com porcentagem de concordância igual ou inferior a 80%.
RESULTS: 13 avaliadores responderam a análise, todos do sexo feminino, com média de idade de 39,07 anos, sendo oito mestres e cinco doutoras, com atuação clínica generalista média de 15,38 anos. Os valores médios do Coeficiente de Validade de Conteúdo Corrigido foram 0,93 e 0,95 para o critério de clareza; 0,98 e 0,92 para o critério de pertinência; e 0,99 para o critério de ética. Duas questões apresentaram notas de 0,78 e 0,80, sendo ambas da área de audiologia no domínio de avaliação/diagnóstico, para a questão relacionada ao critério de pertinência, sendo revisadas e reestruturadas pelos juízes.
UNASSIGNED: O FonoTCS é um instrumento válido do ponto de vista do conteúdo.

OBJECTIVE: This study developed and implemented case-based flipped learning using illness script worksheets and investigated the responses of preclinical students and professors to the intervention in terms of its effectiveness, design, and implementation.
METHODS: The study was conducted at a medical school in Korea, where the \"clinical reasoning method\" course, originally a lecture-oriented course, was redesigned into a flipped learning. In total, 42 second-year medical students and 15 professors participated in this course. After the class, online surveys were conducted, and a focus group interview was held with seven students to explore the students\' experiences in more detail.
RESULTS: In total, 37 students and seven professors participated in the survey. The mean score for all items is 3.12/4 for the student survey and 3.43/4 for the professor survey. The focus group interview results were categorized as the beneficial aspects and challenges for the development of clinical reasoning.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings indicated that their responses to the intervention were generally positive, and it is thought to be an effective instructional method for fostering clinical reasoning skills in preclinical medical students.