Measuring sociocultural engagement of health professions education students: a psychometric study.

BACKGROUND: Sociocultural engagement of students refers to broadening viewpoints and providing awareness of, and respect for, diverse backgrounds and perspectives. However, there are no existing validated instruments in the literature for measuring sociocultural engagement of health professions education (HPE) students. Therefore, the aim of this study is to develop and validate a questionnaire designed to assess sociocultural engagement among HPE students. METHODS: The study included undergraduate HPE students (n = 683) at Gulf Medical University. The initial version of the sociocultural engagement of students' questionnaire (SESQ) was developed after extensive literature review and guided by the Global Learning Qualifications Framework. We then tested the content validity of the questionnaire by using focus group discussion with subject experts (n = 16) and pilot testing with students (n = 20). We distributed the content-validated version of the SESQ (16 items) to undergraduate students in six HPE colleges. To examine the construct validity and construct reliability of the questionnaire, we conducted exploratory factor analysis, followed by confirmatory factor analysis. RESULTS: Confirmatory factor analysis supported the two-factor structure which consists of 13 items with good fitness indices (χ2 = 214.35, df = 61, χ 2/df = 3.51, CFI = 0.98, RMSEA = 0.06, SRMR = 0.025, and AIC = 208.00). The two factors were sociocultural interactions (8 items) and sociocultural adaptation (5 items). The construct reliability of the total questionnaire is 0.97 and the two factors were 0.93 and 0.92 for sociocultural interactions and sociocultural adaptation, respectively. In addition, there were significant weak correlations between both factors of sociocultural engagement scores and student satisfaction with the university experience (r = .19 for each, P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: The sociocultural engagement of students' questionnaire exhibits good evidence of construct validity and reliability. Further studies will be required to test the validity of this questionnaire in other contexts.

The influence of context on diagnostic reasoning: A narrative synthesis of experimental findings.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: Contextual information which is implicitly available to physicians during clinical encounters has been shown to influence diagnostic reasoning. To better understand the psychological mechanisms underlying the influence of context on diagnostic accuracy, we conducted a review of experimental research on this topic. METHOD: We searched Web of Science, PubMed, and Scopus for relevant articles and looked for additional records by reading the references and approaching experts. We limited the review to true experiments involving physicians in which the outcome variable was the accuracy of the diagnosis. RESULTS: The 43 studies reviewed examined two categories of contextual variables: (a) case-intrinsic contextual information and (b) case-extrinsic contextual information. Case-intrinsic information includes implicit misleading diagnostic suggestions in the disease history of the patient, or emotional volatility of the patient. Case-extrinsic or situational information includes a similar (but different) case seen previously, perceived case difficulty, or external digital diagnostic support. Time pressure and interruptions are other extrinsic influences that may affect the accuracy of a diagnosis but have produced conflicting findings. CONCLUSION: We propose two tentative hypotheses explaining the role of context in diagnostic accuracy. According to the negative-affect hypothesis, diagnostic errors emerge when the physician's attention shifts from the relevant clinical findings to the (irrelevant) source of negative affect (for instance patient aggression) raised in a clinical encounter. The early-diagnosis-primacy hypothesis attributes errors to the extraordinary influence of the initial hypothesis that comes to the physician's mind on the subsequent collecting and interpretation of case information. Future research should test these mechanisms explicitly. Possible alternative mechanisms such as premature closure or increased production of (irrelevant) rival diagnoses in response to context deserve further scrutiny. Implications for medical education and practice are discussed.

Overconfidence, Time-on-Task, and Medical Errors: Is There a Relationship?

Background: Literature suggest that physicians' high level of confidence has a negative impact on medical decisions, and this may lead to medical errors. Experimental research is lacking; however, this study investigated the effects of high confidence on diagnostic accuracy. Methods: Forty internal medicine residents from different hospitals in Saudi Arabia were divided randomly into two groups: A high-confidence group as an experimental and a low-confidence group acting as a control. Both groups solved each of eight written complex clinical vignettes. Before diagnosing these cases, the high-confidence group was led to believe that the task was easy, while the low-confidence group was presented with information from which it could deduce that the diagnostic task was difficult. Level of confidence, response time, and diagnostic accuracy were recorded. Results: The participants in the high-confidence group had a significantly higher confidence level than those in the control group: 0.75 compared to 0.61 (maximum 1.00). However, neither time on task nor diagnostic accuracy significantly differed between the two groups. Conclusion: In the literature, high confidence as one of common cognitive biases has a strong association with medical error. Even though the high-confidence group spent somewhat less time on the cases, suggesting potential premature decision-making, we failed to find differences in diagnostic accuracy. It is suggested that overconfidence should be studied as a personality trait rather than as a malleable characteristic.

Serendipity in oto-rhino-laryngology.

INTRODUCTION: Serendipitous findings are findings that were initially unsought but nevertheless contribute to the development of the discipline. This article reviews eight serendipitous findings in oto-rhino-laryngology important to its advancement. METHOD: The following serendipitous findings are discussed: the accidental discovery of the laryngeal mirror and indirect laryngoscopy by Garcia (1854), the invention of direct oesophagoscopy by Kußmaul (circa 1868), Czermák's (1863) development of diaphanoscopy, the unintentional emergence of bronchography from a clinical error made by Weingartner (1914), adenotomy by Meyer (1869), the discovery of the causes of unbalance related to the vestibular nerve by Flourens (1830), Bárány's (1914) finding that the semi-circular canal reflex is involved in equilibrium, and the relationship between gastroesophageal reflux and middle-ear infections by Poelmans and Feenstra (2002). DISCUSSION: Based on these case studies we conclude that serendipity, defined as the art of making an initially unsought find, does not always appear out of nowhere. Often the researcher is already wrestling with a problem for which the serendipitous finding provides a solution. Sometimes the serendipitous finding enables the application of a known solution to a new problem. And sometimes a serendipitous finding is not recognized as such or considered unimportant. Since observations tend to be theory-loaded, having appropriate background knowledge is a conditio sine qua non to elaborate an unanticipated observation.

Role of knowledge and reasoning processes as predictors of resident physicians' susceptibility to anchoring bias in diagnostic reasoning: a randomised controlled experiment.

BACKGROUND: Diagnostic errors have been attributed to reasoning flaws caused by cognitive biases. While experiments have shown bias to cause errors, physicians of similar expertise differed in susceptibility to bias. Resisting bias is often said to depend on engaging analytical reasoning, disregarding the influence of knowledge. We examined the role of knowledge and reasoning mode, indicated by diagnosis time and confidence, as predictors of susceptibility to anchoring bias. Anchoring bias occurs when physicians stick to an incorrect diagnosis triggered by early salient distracting features (SDF) despite subsequent conflicting information. METHODS: Sixty-eight internal medicine residents from two Dutch university hospitals participated in a two-phase experiment. Phase 1: assessment of knowledge of discriminating features (ie, clinical findings that discriminate between lookalike diseases) for six diseases. Phase 2 (1 week later): diagnosis of six cases of these diseases. Each case had two versions differing exclusively in the presence/absence of SDF. Each participant diagnosed three cases with SDF (SDF+) and three without (SDF-). Participants were randomly allocated to case versions. Based on phase 1 assessment, participants were split into higher knowledge or lower knowledge groups. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: frequency of diagnoses associated with SDF; time to diagnose; and confidence in diagnosis. RESULTS: While both knowledge groups performed similarly on SDF- cases, higher knowledge physicians succumbed to anchoring bias less frequently than their lower knowledge counterparts on SDF+ cases (p=0.02). Overall, physicians spent more time (p<0.001) and had lower confidence (p=0.02) on SDF+ than SDF- cases (p<0.001). However, when diagnosing SDF+ cases, the groups did not differ in time (p=0.88) nor in confidence (p=0.96). CONCLUSIONS: Physicians apparently adopted a more analytical reasoning approach when presented with distracting features, indicated by increased time and lower confidence, trying to combat bias. Yet, extended deliberation alone did not explain the observed performance differences between knowledge groups. Success in mitigating anchoring bias was primarily predicted by knowledge of discriminating features of diagnoses.

Construct validity of a questionnaire for measuring student engagement in problem-based learning tutorials.

BACKGROUND: Student engagement is student investment of time and energy in academic and non-academic experiences that include learning, teaching, research, governance, and community activities. Although previous studies provided some evidence of measuring student engagement in PBL tutorials, there are no existing quantitative studies in which cognitive, behavioral, and emotional engagement of students in PBL tutorials is measured. Therefore, this study aims to develop and examine the construct validity of a questionnaire for measuring cognitive, behavioral, and emotional engagement of students in PBL tutorials. METHODS: A 15-item questionnaire was developed guided by a previously published conceptual framework of student engagement. Focus group discussion (n = 12) with medical education experts was then conducted and the questionnaire was piloted with medical students. The questionnaire was then distributed to year 2 and 3 medical students (n = 176) in problem-based tutorial groups at the end of an integrated course, where PBL is the main strategy of learning. The validity of the internal structure of the questionnaire was tested by confirmatory factor analysis using structural equation modeling assuming five different models. Predictive validity evidence of the questionnaire was studied by examining the correlations between students' engagement and academic achievement. RESULTS: Confirmatory factor analysis indicates a good fit between the measurement and structural model of an 11-item questionnaire composed of a three-factor structure: behavioral engagement (3 items), emotional engagement (4 items), and cognitive engagement (4 items). Models in which the three latent factors were considered semi-independent provided the best fit. The construct reliabilities of behavioral, cognitive, and emotional factors were 0.82, 0.82, and 0.76, respectively. We failed however to find significant relationships between academic achievement and engagement. CONCLUSIONS: We found a strong evidence to support the construct validity of a three-factor structure of student engagement in PBL tutorial questionnaire. Further studies are required to test the validity of this instrument in other educational settings. The predictive validity is another area needing further scrutiny.

"Studying cognitive reappraisal as an antidote to the effect of negative emotions on medical residents' learning: a randomized experiment".

BACKGROUND: Medical trainees often encounter situations that trigger emotional reactions which may hinder learning. Evidence of this effect on medical trainees is scarce and whether it could be counteracted is unclear. This study investigated the effect of negative emotions on medical residents' learning and whether cognitive reappraisal counteracts it. METHODS: Ninety-nine medical residents participated in a three-phase experiment consisting of: (1) watching a video, either a neutral or an emotion-induction version, the latter either followed by cognitive reappraisal or not (2) learning: all participants studied the same medical text; study-time and cognitive engagement were measured; (3) test: a recall-test measured learning. Data was analysed using Chi-square test and one-way ANOVA. RESULTS: Study time significantly varied between conditions (p = 0.002). The two emotional conditions spent similar time, both significantly less than the neutral condition. The difference in test scores failed to reach significance level (p = 0.053). While the emotional conditions performed similarly, their scores tended to be lower than those of the neutral condition. CONCLUSION: Negative emotions can adversely affect medical residents' learning. The effect of emotions was not counteracted by cognitive reappraisal, which has been successfully employed to regulate emotions in other domains. Further research to examine emotion regulation strategies appropriate for medical education is much needed.

Deliberate reflection and clinical reasoning: Founding ideas and empirical findings.

CONTEXT: The idea that reflection improves reasoning and learning, since long present in other fields, emerged in the 90s in the medical education literature. Since then, the number of publications on reflection as a means to improve diagnostic learning and clinical problem-solving has increased steeply. Recently, concerns with diagnostic errors have raised further interest in reflection. Several approaches based on reflection have been proposed to reduce clinicians' errors during diagnostic reasoning. What reflection entails varies substantially, and most approaches still require empirical examination. PURPOSE: The present essay aims to help clarify the role of deliberate reflection in diagnostic reasoning. Deliberate reflection is an approach whose effects on diagnostic reasoning and learning have been empirically studied over the past 15 years. The philosophical roots of the approach will be briefly examined, and the theory and practice of deliberate reflection, particularly its effectiveness, will be reviewed. Lessons learned and unresolved issues will be discussed. DISCUSSION: The deliberate reflection approach originated from a conceptualization of the nature of reflection practice in medicine informed by Dewey's and Schön's work. The approach guides physicians through systematically reviewing the grounds of their initial diagnosis and considering alternatives. Experimental evidence has supported the effectiveness of deliberate reflection in increasing physicians' diagnostic performance, particularly in nonstraightforward diagnostic tasks. Deliberate reflection has also proved helpful to improve students' diagnostic learning and to facilitate learning of new information. The mechanisms behind the effects of deliberate reflection remain unclear. Tentative explanations focus on the activation/reorganisation of prior knowledge induced by deliberate reflection. Its usefulness depends therefore on the difficulty of the problem relative to the clinician's knowledge. Further research should examine variations in instructions on how to reflect upon a case, the value of further guidance while learning from deliberate reflection, and its benefits in real practice.

Improving diagnostic decision support through deliberate reflection: a proposal.

Digital decision support (DDS) is expected to play an important role in improving a physician's diagnostic performance and reducing the burden of diagnostic error. Studies with currently available DDS systems indicate that they lead to modest gains in diagnostic accuracy, and these systems are expected to evolve to become more effective and user-friendly in the future. In this position paper, we propose that a way towards this future is to rethink DDS systems based on deliberate reflection, a strategy by which physicians systematically review the clinical findings observed in a patient in the light of an initial diagnosis. Deliberate reflection has been demonstrated to improve diagnostic accuracy in several contexts. In this paper, we first describe the deliberate reflection strategy, including the crucial element that would make it useful in the interaction with a DDS system. We examine the nature of conventional DDS systems and their shortcomings. Finally, we propose what DDS based on deliberate reflection might look like, and consider why it would overcome downsides of conventional DDS.

Failure to demonstrate effects of interruptions on diagnostic reasoning: three experiments.

BACKGROUND: Diagnostic error is a major source of patient suffering. Researchshows that physicians experience frequent interruptions while being engaged with patients and indicate that diagnostic accuracy may be impaired as a result. Since most studies in the field are observational, there is as yet no evidence suggesting a direct causal link between being interrupted and diagnostic error. Theexperiments reported in this article were intended to assess this hypothesis. METHODS: Three experiments were conducted to test the hypothesis that interruptions hurt diagnostic reasoning and increase time on task. In the first experiment (N = 42), internal medicine residents, while diagnosing vignettes of actual clinical cases were interrupted halfway with a task unrelated to medicine, solving word-spotting puzzles and anagrams. In the second experiment (N = 78), the interruptions were medically relevant ones. In the third experiment (N = 30), we put additional time pressure on the participants. In all these experiments, a control group diagnosed the cases without interruption. Dependent variables were diagnostic accuracy and amount of time spent on the vignettes. RESULTS: In none of the experiments interruptions were demonstrated to influence diagnostic accuracy. In Experiment 1: Mean of interrupted group was 0.88 (SD = 0.37) versus non- interrupted group 0.91 (SD = 0.32). In Experiment 2: Mean of interrupted group was 0.95 (SD = 0.32) versus non-interrupted group 0.94 (SD = 0.38). In Experiment 3: Mean of interrupted group was 0.42 (SD = 0.12) versus non-interrupted group 0.37 (SD = 0.08). Although interrupted residents in all experiments needed more time to complete the diagnostic task, only in Experiment 2, this effect was statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: These three experiments, taken together, failed to demonstrate negative effects of interruptions on diagnostic reasoning. Perhaps physicians who are interrupted may still have sufficient cognitive resources available to recover from it most of the time.

What happens to misunderstandings of biomedical concepts across a medical curriculum?

Research on the extent and nature of commonly misunderstood fundamental biomedical concepts across a medical curriculum is scarce. These misunderstandings could point toward robust misconceptions. We examined first whether common misunderstandings persist throughout a medical curriculum, followed by a fine-grained analysis to identify their nature. We designed and administered a 2-tier test to 987 medical students across our curriculum, with 8 questions covering the respiratory and cardiovascular systems, cell division, and homeostatic processes. Proportions of incorrect responses were computed. Four questions where misunderstandings persisted were further qualitatively analyzed. A one-way ANOVA showed the proportion of incorrect responses decreased significantly by students' academic year [F(6, 986) = 96.05, P < 0.001]. While novices and end-of -first-year students showed similar proportion of incorrect responses (P > 0.05), incorrect responses decreased significantly between first years and second years (P < 0.001). Thereafter, the proportion of incorrect responses remained stable from second to final year (P > 0.05), with ∼35% of incorrect responses. Five questions showed no decrease of incorrect responses between second and final years, with two questions where final year students performed marginally better than novices. A Chi-square analysis, with Bonferroni post hoc test, showed certain misunderstandings appeared frequently across the curriculum. The qualitative analysis of the open-ended questions yielded 15 categories of common misunderstandings of fundamental biomedical concepts in all years of training. If educators become aware of commonly misunderstood biomedical concepts, preventative measures could be taken to prevent robust misconceptions.

Promotion of knowledge transfer and retention in year 2 medical students using an online training exercise.

It was recently shown that novice medical students could be trained to demonstrate the speed-to-diagnosis and diagnostic accuracy typical of System-1-type reasoning. However, the effectiveness of this training can only be fully evaluated when considering the extent to which knowledge transfer and long-term retention occur as a result, the former of which is known to be notoriously difficult to achieve. This study aimed to investigate whether knowledge learned during an online training exercise for chest X-ray diagnosis promoted either knowledge transfer or retention, or both. Second year medical students were presented with, and trained to recognise the features of four chest X-ray conditions. Subsequently, they were shown the four trained-for cases again as well as different representations of the same conditions varying in the number of common elements and asked to provide a diagnosis, to test for near-transfer (four cases) and far-transfer (four cases) of knowledge. They were also shown four completely new conditions to diagnose. Two weeks later they were asked to diagnose the 16 aforementioned cases again to assess for knowledge retention. Dependent variables were diagnostic accuracy and time-to-diagnosis. Thirty-six students volunteered. Trained-for cases were diagnosed most accurately and with most speed (mean score = 3.75/4, mean time = 4.95 s). When assessing knowledge transfer, participants were able to diagnose near-transfer cases more accurately (mean score = 2.08/4, mean time = 15.77 s) than far-transfer cases (mean score = 1.31/4, mean time = 18.80 s), which showed similar results to those conditions previously unseen (mean score = 0.72/4, mean time = 19.46 s). Retention tests showed a similar pattern but accuracy scores were lower overall. This study demonstrates that it is possible to successfully promote knowledge transfer and retention in Year 2 medical students, using an online training exercise involving diagnosis of chest X-rays, and is one of the few studies to provide evidence of actual knowledge transfer.

Specific Disease Knowledge as Predictor of Susceptibility to Availability Bias in Diagnostic Reasoning: a Randomized Controlled Experiment.

BACKGROUND: Bias in reasoning rather than knowledge gaps has been identified as the origin of most diagnostic errors. However, the role of knowledge in counteracting bias is unclear. OBJECTIVE: To examine whether knowledge of discriminating features (findings that discriminate between look-alike diseases) predicts susceptibility to bias. DESIGN: Three-phase randomized experiment. Phase 1 (bias-inducing): Participants were exposed to a set of clinical cases (either hepatitis-IBD or AMI-encephalopathy). Phase 2 (diagnosis): All participants diagnosed the same cases; 4 resembled hepatitis-IBD, 4 AMI-encephalopathy (but all with different diagnoses). Availability bias was expected in the 4 cases similar to those encountered in phase 1. Phase 3 (knowledge evaluation): For each disease, participants decided (max. 2 s) which of 24 findings was associated with the disease. Accuracy of decisions on discriminating features, taken as a measure of knowledge, was expected to predict susceptibility to bias. PARTICIPANTS: Internal medicine residents at Erasmus MC, Netherlands. MAIN MEASURES: The frequency with which higher-knowledge and lower-knowledge physicians gave biased diagnoses based on phase 1 exposure (range 0-4). Time to diagnose was also measured. KEY RESULTS: Sixty-two physicians participated. Higher-knowledge physicians yielded to availability bias less often than lower-knowledge physicians (0.35 vs 0.97; p = 0.001; difference, 0.62 [95% CI, 0.28-0.95]). Whereas lower-knowledge physicians tended to make more of these errors on subjected-to-bias than on not-subjected-to-bias cases (p = 0.06; difference, 0.35 [CI, - 0.02-0.73]), higher-knowledge physicians resisted the bias (p = 0.28). Both groups spent more time to diagnose subjected-to-bias than not-subjected-to-bias cases (p = 0.04), without differences between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Knowledge of features that discriminate between look-alike diseases reduced susceptibility to bias in a simulated setting. Reflecting further may be required to overcome bias, but succeeding depends on having the appropriate knowledge. Future research should examine whether the findings apply to real practice and to more experienced physicians.

Exploring mechanisms underlying learning from deliberate reflection: An experimental study.

INTRODUCTION: Previous research suggests that, relative to generating a differential diagnosis, deliberate reflection during practice with clinical cases fosters learning from a subsequently studied scientific text and promotes interest in the subject matter. The present experiment aimed to replicate these findings and to examine whether motivational or cognitive mechanisms, or both, underlie the positive effects of reflection. METHODS: A total of 101 5th-year medical students participated in an experiment containing four phases: Students (a) diagnosed two clinical cases of jaundice-related diseases either through deliberate reflection or differential diagnosis; (b) reported their situational interest and awareness of knowledge gaps; (c) studied a text about jaundice, either under free or restricted time; and (d) recalled the text. Outcome measures were text-recall, situational interest and awareness of knowledge gaps. RESULTS: A main effect of diagnostic approach on recall of the text was found, with the reflection group recalling more studied material than the differential diagnosis group (means: 72.56 vs 58.80; P = .01). No interaction between diagnostic approach and study time (free or restricted) emerged, nor was there a main effect of the latter. Relative to the differential diagnosis group, students who reflected upon the cases scored significantly higher on both situational interest (means: 4.45 vs 3.99, P < .001) and awareness of knowledge gaps (means: 4.13 vs 3.85, P < .01). DISCUSSION: Relative to generating differential diagnoses, reflection upon clinical cases increased learning outcomes on a subsequent study task, an effect that was independent of study time, suggesting that cognitive mechanisms underlie this effect, rather than increases in motivation to study. However, higher scores on situational interest and awareness of knowledge gaps and a tendency towards larger gains when time was free suggest that higher motivation may also contribute to learning from reflection.

How cognitive psychology changed the face of medical education research.

In this article, the contributions of cognitive psychology to research and development of medical education are assessed. The cognitive psychology of learning consists of activation of prior knowledge while processing new information and elaboration on the resulting new knowledge to facilitate storing in long-term memory. This process is limited by the size of working memory. Six interventions based on cognitive theory that facilitate learning and expertise development are discussed: (1) Fostering self-explanation, (2) elaborative discussion, and (3) distributed practice; (4) help with decreasing cognitive load, (5) promoting retrieval practice, and (6) supporting interleaving practice. These interventions contribute in different measure to various instructional methods in use in medical education: problem-based learning, team-based learning, worked examples, mixed practice, serial-cue presentation, and deliberate reflection. The article concludes that systematic research into the applicability of these ideas to the practice of medical education presently is limited and should be intensified.

Thinking fast or slow? Functional magnetic resonance imaging reveals stronger connectivity when experienced neurologists diagnose ambiguous cases.

For ∼40 years, thinking about reasoning has been dominated by dual-process theories. This model, consisting of two distinct types of human reasoning, one fast and effortless and the other slow and deliberate, has also been applied to medical diagnosis. Medical experts are trained to diagnose patients based on their symptoms. When symptoms are prototypical for a certain diagnosis, practitioners may rely on fast, recognition-based reasoning. However, if they are confronted with ambiguous clinical information slower, analytical reasoning is required. To examine the neural underpinnings of these two hypothesized forms of reasoning, 16 highly experienced clinical neurologists were asked to diagnose two types of medical cases, straightforward and ambiguous cases, while functional magnetic resonance imaging was being recorded. Compared with reading control sentences, diagnosing cases resulted in increased activation in brain areas typically found to be active during reasoning such as the caudate nucleus and frontal and parietal cortical regions. In addition, we found vast increased activity in the cerebellum. Regarding the activation differences between the two types of reasoning, no pronounced differences were observed in terms of regional activation. Notable differences were observed, though, in functional connectivity: cases containing ambiguous information showed stronger connectivity between specific regions in the frontal, parietal and temporal cortex in addition to the cerebellum. Based on these results, we propose that the higher demands in terms of controlled cognitive processing during analytical medical reasoning may be subserved by stronger communication between key regions for detecting and resolving uncertainty.

'Immunising' physicians against availability bias in diagnostic reasoning: a randomised controlled experiment.

BACKGROUND: Diagnostic errors have often been attributed to biases in physicians' reasoning. Interventions to 'immunise' physicians against bias have focused on improving reasoning processes and have largely failed. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of increasing physicians' relevant knowledge on their susceptibility to availability bias. DESIGN, SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS: Three-phase multicentre randomised experiment with second-year internal medicine residents from eight teaching hospitals in Brazil. INTERVENTIONS: Immunisation: Physicians diagnosed one of two sets of vignettes (either diseases associated with chronic diarrhoea or with jaundice) and compared/contrasted alternative diagnoses with feedback. Biasing phase (1 week later): Physicians were biased towards either inflammatory bowel disease or viral hepatitis. Diagnostic performance test: All physicians diagnosed three vignettes resembling inflammatory bowel disease, three resembling hepatitis (however, all with different diagnoses). Physicians who increased their knowledge of either chronic diarrhoea or jaundice 1 week earlier were expected to resist the bias attempt. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Diagnostic accuracy, measured by test score (range 0-1), computed for subjected-to-bias and not-subjected-to-bias vignettes diagnosed by immunised and not-immunised physicians. RESULTS: Ninety-one residents participated in the experiment. Diagnostic accuracy differed on subjected-to-bias vignettes, with immunised physicians performing better than non-immunised physicians (0.40 vs 0.24; difference in accuracy 0.16 (95% CI 0.05 to 0.27); p=0.004), but not on not-subjected-to-bias vignettes (0.36 vs 0.41; difference -0.05 (95% CI -0.17 to 0.08); p=0.45). Bias only hampered non-immunised physicians, who performed worse on subjected-to-bias than not-subjected-to-bias vignettes (difference -0.17 (95% CI -0.28 to -0.05); p=0.005); immunised physicians' accuracy did not differ (p=0.56). CONCLUSIONS: An intervention directed at increasing knowledge of clinical findings that discriminate between similar-looking diseases decreased physicians' susceptibility to availability bias, reducing diagnostic errors, in a simulated setting. Future research needs to examine the degree to which the intervention benefits other disease clusters and performance in clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: 68745917.1.1001.0068.

Think Twice: Effects on Diagnostic Accuracy of Returning to the Case to Reflect Upon the Initial Diagnosis.

PURPOSE: Diagnostic errors have been attributed to failure to sufficiently reflect on initial diagnoses. However, evidence of the benefits of reflection is conflicting. This study examined whether reflection upon initial diagnoses on difficult cases improved diagnostic accuracy and whether reflection triggered by confrontation with case evidence was more beneficial than simply revising initial diagnoses. METHOD: Participants were physicians in Bern, Switzerland, registered for the 2018 Swiss internal medicine certification exam. They diagnosed written clinical cases, providing an initial diagnosis by following the same instructions and returning to the case to provide a final diagnosis. The latter required different types of reflection depending on the physician's experimental condition: return without instructions, identify confirmatory evidence, identify contradictory evidence, or identify both confirmatory and contradictory evidence. The authors examined diagnostic accuracy scores (range 0-1) as a function of diagnostic phase and reflection type. RESULTS: One hundred and sixty-seven physicians participated. Diagnostic accuracy scores did not significantly differ between the 4 groups of physicians in the initial (I) or the final (F) diagnostic phase (mean [95% CI]: return without instructions, I: 0.21 [0.17, 0.26], F: 0.23 [0.18, 0.28]; confirmatory evidence, I: 0.24 [0.19, 0.29], F: 0.31 [0.25, 0.37]; contradictory evidence, I: 0.22 [0.17, 0.26], F: 0.26 [0.22, 0.30]; confirmatory and contradictory evidence, I: 0.19 [0.15, 0.23], F: 0.25 [0.20, 0.31]). Regardless of type of reflection employed while revising the case, accuracy increased significantly between initial and final diagnosis, I: 0.22 (0.19, 0.24) vs F: 0.26 (0.24, 0.29); P < .001. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians' diagnostic accuracy improved after reflecting upon initial diagnoses provided for difficult cases, independently of the evidence searched for while reflecting. The findings support the importance attributed to reflection in clinical teaching. Future research should investigate whether revising the case can become more beneficial by triggering additional reflection.

Team-Based Learning Analytics: An Empirical Case Study.

Many medical schools that have implemented team-based learning (TBL) have also incorporated an electronic learning architecture, commonly referred to as a learning management system (LMS), to support the instructional process. However, one LMS feature that is often overlooked is the LMS's ability to record data that can be used for further analysis. In this article, the authors present a case study illustrating how one medical school used data that are routinely collected via the school's LMS to make informed decisions. The case study started with one instructor's observation that some teams in one of the undergraduate medical education learning modules appeared to be struggling during one of the team activities; that is, some teams seemed unable to explain or justify their responses to items on the team readiness assurance test (tRAT). Following this observation, the authors conducted 4 analyses. Their analyses demonstrate how LMS-generated and recorded data can be used in a systematic manner to investigate issues in the real educational environment. The first analysis identified a team that performed significantly poorer on the tRAT. A subsequent analysis investigated whether the weaker team's poorer performance was consistent over a whole module. Findings revealed that the weaker team performed poorer on the majority of the TBL sessions. Further investigation using LMS data showed that the weaker performance was due to the lack of preparation of one individual team member (rather than a collective poor tRAT performance). Using the findings obtained from this case study, the authors hope to convey how LMS data are powerful and may form the basis of evidence-based educational decision making.

Do poor patients suffer from inaccurate diagnoses more than well-to-do patients? A randomized control trial.

BACKGROUND: Poor patients have greater morbidity and die up to 10 years earlier than patients who have higher socio-economic status. These findings are often attributed to differences in life-style between groups. The present study aimed at investigating the extent to which physicians contribute to the effect by providing relative poorer care, resulting in relative neglect in terms of time spent with a poor patient and more inaccurate diagnoses. METHODS: A randomised experiment with 45 internal medicine residents. Doctors diagnosed 12 written clinical vignettes that were exactly the same except for the description of the patients' socio-economic status. Each participant diagnosed four of the vignettes in a poor-patient version, four in a rich-patient version, and four in a version that did not contain socio-economic markers, in a balanced within-subjects incomplete block design. Main measurements were: diagnostic accuracy scores and time spent on diagnosis. RESULTS: Mean diagnostic accuracy scores (range 0-1) did not significantly differ among the conditions of the experiment (for poor patients: 0.48; for rich patients: 0.52; for patients without socio-economic markers: 0.54; p > 0.05). While confronted with patients not presenting with socio-economic background information, the participants spent significantly less time-to-diagnosis ((for poor patients: 168 s; for rich patients: 176 s; for patients without socio-economic markers: 151 s; p < 0.01), however due to the fact that the former vignettes were shorter. CONCLUSION: There is no reason to believe that physicians are prejudiced against poor patients and therefore treat them differently from rich patients or patients without discernible socio-economic background.