Evaluating the Clinical Reasoning of Student Health Professionals in Placement and Simulation Settings: A Systematic Review

被引:25
作者
Brentnall, Jennie [1 ]
Thackray, Debbie [2 ]
Judd, Belinda [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Sydney, Fac Med & Hlth, Work Integrated Learning, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia
[2] Univ Southampton, Sch Hlth Sci, Physiotherapy, Southampton SO17 1BJ, Hants, England
关键词
clinical reasoning; medicine; nursing; allied health; students; assessment and evaluation; SCRIPT CONCORDANCE TEST; EMERGENCY-MEDICINE CLERKSHIP; CRITICAL THINKING SKILLS; NURSING-STUDENTS; ASSESSMENT-TOOL; SELF-EFFICACY; JUDGMENT; VALIDATION; RELIABILITY; INSTRUMENT;
D O I
10.3390/ijerph19020936
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
(1) Background: Clinical reasoning is essential to the effective practice of autonomous health professionals and is, therefore, an essential capability to develop as students. This review aimed to systematically identify the tools available to health professional educators to evaluate students' attainment of clinical reasoning capabilities in clinical placement and simulation settings. (2) Methods: A systemic review of seven databases was undertaken. Peer-reviewed, English-language publications reporting studies that developed or tested relevant tools were included. Searches included multiple terms related to clinical reasoning and health disciplines. Data regarding each tool's conceptual basis and evaluated constructs were systematically extracted and analysed. (3) Results: Most of the 61 included papers evaluated students in medical and nursing disciplines, and over half reported on the Script Concordance Test or Lasater Clinical Judgement Rubric. A number of conceptual frameworks were referenced, though many papers did not reference any framework. (4) Conclusions: Overall, key outcomes highlighted an emphasis on diagnostic reasoning, as opposed to management reasoning. Tools were predominantly aligned with individual health disciplines and with limited cross-referencing within the field. Future research into clinical reasoning evaluation tools should build on and refer to existing approaches and consider contributions across professional disciplinary divides.
引用
收藏
页数:15
相关论文
共 95 条
  • [1] Rater Bias in Simulation Performance Assessment: Examining the Effect of Participant Race/Ethnicity
    Adamson, Katie
    [J]. NURSING EDUCATION PERSPECTIVES, 2016, 37 (02) : 78 - 82
  • [2] A METHOD and RESOURCES for ASSESSING the Reliability of Simulation Evaluation Instruments
    Adamson, Katie A.
    Kardong-Edgren, Suzan
    [J]. NURSING EDUCATION PERSPECTIVES, 2012, 33 (05) : 334 - 339
  • [3] Reliability of assessment of critical thinking
    Allen, GD
    Rubenfeld, MG
    Scheffer, BK
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PROFESSIONAL NURSING, 2004, 20 (01) : 15 - 22
  • [4] Amini M., 2017, BIOMED RES-TOKYO, V28, P8397
  • [5] [Anonymous], 1990, CRITICAL THINKING ST
  • [6] [Anonymous], 2015, CRITICAL THINKING WH
  • [7] Simulation Evaluation Using a Modified Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric
    Ashcraft, Alyce S.
    Opton, Laura
    Bridges, Ruth Ann
    Caballero, Sandra
    Veesart, Amanda
    Weaver, Christy
    [J]. NURSING EDUCATION PERSPECTIVES, 2013, 34 (02) : 122 - 126
  • [8] The IDEA Assessment Tool: Assessing the Reporting, Diagnostic Reasoning, and Decision-Making Skills Demonstrated in Medical Students' Hospital Admission Notes
    Baker, Elizabeth A.
    Ledford, Cynthia H.
    Fogg, Louis
    Way, David P.
    Park, Yoon Soo
    [J]. TEACHING AND LEARNING IN MEDICINE, 2015, 27 (02) : 163 - 173
  • [9] SELF-EFFICACY - TOWARD A UNIFYING THEORY OF BEHAVIORAL CHANGE
    BANDURA, A
    [J]. PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW, 1977, 84 (02) : 191 - 215
  • [10] Bandura A., 1977, Social learning theory, V1