To Örebro University

oru.seÖrebro University Publications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
The need for longitudinal clinical reasoning teaching and assessment: Results of an international survey
Department of Bioinformatics and Telemedicine, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Kraków, Poland.
Medical Education Sciences, Medical School, University of Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany.
Örebro University, School of Health Sciences. (Learning and Professional Development Group)ORCID iD: 0000-0002-1110-0782
Faculty of Medicine, Centre for Medical Education, University of Maribor, Maribor, Slovenia.
Show others and affiliations
2020 (English)In: Medical teacher, ISSN 0142-159X, E-ISSN 1466-187X, Vol. 42, no 4, p. 457-462Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Background: Clinical reasoning is a key ability essential for practising health professionals. However, little is known about the current global adoption of clinical reasoning teaching and assessment.

Purpose: We aimed to provide insights into how clinical reasoning is deliberately taught and assessed in curricula worldwide and to identify needs and perceived barriers for teaching clinical reasoning to students and educators.

Methods: A questionnaire was devised by an international expert group and distributed in a large international medical education community. Data were collected in 2018 and analysed using descriptive statistics. We identified themes in free-text responses using content analysis.

Results: Three hundred and thirteen responses from 76 countries were collected. Most respondents were from Europe (34%). While the presence of a longitudinal clinical reasoning curriculum was only reported by 28%, 85% stated that such a curriculum was needed. The lack of awareness of the need to explicitly teach clinical reasoning was the most commonly identified barrier. For assessment, the greatest need identified was for more workplace-based assessment.

Conclusions: Global respondents indicate the need to implement explicit longitudinal clinical reasoning curricula. Our findings suggest that efforts should be put into improving faculty development, including evidence-based materials on how to teach and assess clinical reasoning.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Taylor & Francis, 2020. Vol. 42, no 4, p. 457-462
Keywords [en]
Clinical reasoning education, curriculum planning, faculty development, survey, workplace-based assessment
National Category
Didactics
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-79945DOI: 10.1080/0142159X.2019.1708293ISI: 000512785000001PubMedID: 32017640Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85083533213OAI: oai:DiVA.org:oru-79945DiVA, id: diva2:1394675
Available from: 2020-02-19 Created: 2020-02-19 Last updated: 2020-05-12Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Authority records

Edelbring, Samuel

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Edelbring, Samuel
By organisation
School of Health Sciences
In the same journal
Medical teacher
Didactics

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 143 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf