The Bobath Clinical Reasoning Framework: A systems science approach to the complexity of neurodevelopmental conditions, including cerebral palsy.

The current recommended developmental Bobath practice within the Bobath Clinical Reasoning Framework (BCRF) can be conceptualized using the lens of systems science, thereby providing a holistic perspective on the interrelatedness and interconnectedness of the variables associated with childhood-onset disability. The BCRF is defined as an in-depth clinical reasoning framework that can be applied to help understand the relationships between the domains of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health, how those domains can be influenced, and how they impact each other. The BCRF is a transdisciplinary observational system and practical reasoning approach that results in an intervention plan. This provides a holistic understanding of the complexity of situations associated with disorders such as cerebral palsy (CP) and the basis for the lifelong management and habilitation of people living with neurological disorders. The clinical reasoning used by the BCRF draws on the important contextual factors of the individual and their social environment, primarily the family unit. It is rooted in an understanding of the interrelationships between typical and atypical development, pathophysiology (sensorimotor, cognitive, behavioural), and neuroscience, and the impact of these body structure and function constructs on activity and participation. The systems science model integral to the BCRF is a useful way forward in understanding and responding to the complexity of CP, the overarching goal being to optimize the lived experience of any individual in any context.

Clinical Knowledge and Reasoning Abilities of AI Large Language Models in Anesthesiology: A Comparative Study on the American Board of Anesthesiology Examination.

BACKGROUND: Over the past decade, artificial intelligence (AI) has expanded significantly with increased adoption across various industries, including medicine. Recently, AI-based large language models such as Generative Pretrained Transformer-3 (GPT-3), Bard, and Generative Pretrained Transformer-3 (GPT-4) have demonstrated remarkable language capabilities. While previous studies have explored their potential in general medical knowledge tasks, here we assess their clinical knowledge and reasoning abilities in a specialized medical context. METHODS: We studied and compared the performance of all 3 models on both the written and oral portions of the comprehensive and challenging American Board of Anesthesiology (ABA) examination, which evaluates candidates' knowledge and competence in anesthesia practice. RESULTS: Our results reveal that only GPT-4 successfully passed the written examination, achieving an accuracy of 78% on the basic section and 80% on the advanced section. In comparison, the less recent or smaller GPT-3 and Bard models scored 58% and 47% on the basic examination, and 50% and 46% on the advanced examination, respectively. Consequently, only GPT-4 was evaluated in the oral examination, with examiners concluding that it had a reasonable possibility of passing the structured oral examination. Additionally, we observe that these models exhibit varying degrees of proficiency across distinct topics, which could serve as an indicator of the relative quality of information contained in the corresponding training datasets. This may also act as a predictor for determining which anesthesiology subspecialty is most likely to witness the earliest integration with AI. CONCLUSIONS: GPT-4 outperformed GPT-3 and Bard on both basic and advanced sections of the written ABA examination, and actual board examiners considered GPT-4 to have a reasonable possibility of passing the real oral examination; these models also exhibit varying degrees of proficiency across distinct topics.

'Walking together': How relationships shape physicians' clinical reasoning.

INTRODUCTION: The clinical reasoning literature has increasingly considered context as an important influence on physicians' thinking. Physicians' relationships with patients, and their ongoing efforts to maintain these relationships, are important influences on how clinical reasoning is contextualised. The authors sought to understand how physicians' relationships with patients shaped their clinical reasoning. METHODS: Drawing from constructivist grounded theory, the authors conducted semi-structured interviews with primary care physicians. Participants were asked to reflect on recent challenging clinical experiences, and probing questions were used to explore how participants attended to or leveraged relationships in conjunction with their clinical reasoning. Using constant comparison, three investigators coded transcripts, organising the data into codes and conceptual categories. The research team drew from these codes and categories to develop theory about the phenomenon of interest. RESULTS: The authors interviewed 15 primary care physicians with a range of experience in practice and identified patient agency as a central influence on participants' clinical reasoning. Participants drew from and managed relationships with patients while attending to patients' agency in three ways. First, participants described how contextualised illness constructions enabled them to individualise their approaches to diagnosis and management. Second, participants managed tensions between enacting their typical approaches to clinical problems and adapting their approaches to foster ongoing relationships with patients. Finally, participants attended to relationships with patients' caregivers, seeing these individuals' contributions as important influences on how their clinical reasoning could be enacted within patients' unique social contexts. CONCLUSION: Clinical reasoning is influenced in important ways by physicians' efforts to both draw from, and maintain, their relationships with patients and patients' caregivers. Such efforts create tensions between their professional standards of care and their orientations toward patient-centredness. These influences of relationships on physicians' clinical reasoning have important implications for training and clinical practice.

Clinical reasoning in pharmacy: What do eye movements and verbal protocols tell us about the processing of a case task?

This study investigates pharmacy students' reasoning while solving a case task concerning an acute patient counselling situation in a pharmacy. Participants' (N = 34) reasoning processes were investigated with written tasks utilizing eye-tracking in combination with verbal protocols. The case was presented in three pages, each page being followed by written questions. Eye movements were recorded during case processing. Success in the task required differentiating the relevant information from the task redundant information, and initial activation of several scripts and verification of the most likely one, when additional information became available. 2nd (n = 16) and 3rd (n = 18)-year students' and better and worse succeeding students' processes were compared. The results showed that only a few 2nd-year students solved the case correctly, whereas almost all of the 3rd-year students were successful. Generally, the average total processing times of the case material did not differ between the groups. However, better-succeeding and 3rd-year students processed the very first task-relevant sentences longer, indicating that they were able to focus on relevant information. Differences in the written answers to the 2nd and 3rd question were significant, whereas differences regarding the first question were not. Thus, eye-tracking seems to be able to capture illness script activation during case processing, but other methods are needed to depict the script verification process. Based on the results, pedagogical suggestions for advancing pharmacy education are discussed.

Diagnosis: What Is the Structure of Its Reasoning?

How does the diagnosis process work? This essay traces the philosophical underpinnings of diagnosis from Hume through Kant, Peirce, and Popper, analyzing how pathologists amalgamate sensibility, intuition, and imagination to form new hypotheses that can be tested by evidence and experience.

The relevance of the contribution of psychoneuroendocrinoimmunology and psychology of reasoning and decision making to nursing science: A discursive paper.

AIM: Patients' death or adverse events appear to be associated with poor healthcare decision-making. This might be due to an inability to have an adequate representation of the problem or of the connections among problem-related elements. Changing how a problem is formulated can reduce biases in clinical reasoning. The purpose of this article is to explore the possible contributions of psychoneuroendocrinoimmunology (PNEI) and psychology of reasoning and decision-making (PRDM) to support a new nursing theoretical frame. DESIGN: Discursive paper. METHOD: This article discusses the main assumptions about nursing and nurses' ability to face patient's problems, suggesting a new approach that integrates knowledge from PNEI and PRDM. While PNEI explains the complexity of systems, highlighting the importance of systems connections in affecting health, PRDM underlines the importance of the informative context in creating a mental representation of the problem. Furthermore, PRDM suggests the need to pay attention to information that is not immediately explicit and its connections. CONCLUSION: Nursing recognizes the patient-nurse relationship as the axiom that governs care. The integration of PNEI and PRDM in nursing theoretics allows the expansion of the axiom by providing essential elements to read a new type of relationship: the relationship among information. PNEI explains the relationships between biological systems and the psyche and between the whole individual and the environment; PRDM provides tools for the nurse's analytical thinking system to correctly process information and its connections. IMPACT ON NURSING PRACTICE: A theoretical renewal is mandatory to improve nursing reasoning and nursing priority identification. Integrating PNEI and PRDM into nursing theoretics will modify the way professionals approach patients, reducing cognitive biases and medical errors. NO PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: There was no patient or public involvement in the design or writing of this discursive article.

A novel approach to clinical thinking training for medical students: the combined World Café discussion and case-based learning experience introduction.

It is essential for modern medical students to continuously enhance their clinical thinking abilities. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of the combined World Café discussion and case-based learning (CBL) approach within the clinical thinking training course. The clinical thinking training course incorporated the combined World Café discussion and CBL approach. The assessment of the accuracy and rationality of clinical symptoms, medical examination, pathological processes, diagnostic results, diagnostic basis, and drug use was conducted through case-related queries. Feedback from students and instructors regarding the teaching content, teaching process, and teaching effect was gathered through questionnaires. The findings indicate that the students achieved high marks in all assessed areas, including clinical symptoms, medical examination, pathological processes, diagnostic results, diagnostic basis, and drug use. The feedback from students and instructors on the teaching content, teaching process, and teaching effect was positive. Medical educators can use our findings to implement the combined World Café discussion and CBL mode to enhance student engagement.NEW & NOTEWORTHY The combined World Café discussion and case-based learning approach was implemented in the clinical thinking training course. Students' scores for clinical symptoms, medical examination, pathological process, diagnostic results, diagnostic basis, and drug use were all excellent. Feedback from both students and teachers on the teaching content, teaching process, and teaching effect was positive.

Clinical reasoning during dysphagia assessment and management in acute care: A longitudinal qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Competent clinical reasoning forms the foundation for effective and efficient clinical swallowing examination (CSE) and consequent dysphagia management decisions. While the nature of initial CSEs has been evaluated, it remains unclear how new information gathered by speech-language therapists (SLTs) throughout a patient's acute-care journey is integrated into their initial clinical reasoning and management processes and used to review and revise initial management recommendations. AIMS: To understand how SLTs' clinical reasoning and decision-making regarding dysphagia assessment and management evolve as patients transition through acute hospital care from referral to discharge. METHODS & PROCEDURES: A longitudinal, qualitative approach was employed to gather information from two SLTs who managed six patients at a metropolitan acute-care hospital. A retrospective 'think-aloud' protocol was utilized to prompt SLTs regarding their clinical reasoning and decision-making processes during initial and subsequent CSEs and patient interactions. Three types of concept maps were created based on these interviews: a descriptive concept map, a reasoning map and a hypothesis map. All concept maps were evaluated regarding their overall structure, facts gathered, types of reasoning engaged in (inductive versus deductive), types of hypotheses generated, and the diagnosis and management recommendations made following initial CSE and during subsequent dysphagia management. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: Initial CSEs involved a rich process of fact-gathering, that was predominantly led by inductive reasoning (hypothesis generation) and some application of deductive reasoning (hypothesis testing), with the primary aims of determining the presence of dysphagia and identifying the safest diet and fluid recommendations. During follow-up assessments, SLTs engaged in increasingly more deductive testing of initial hypotheses, including fact-gathering aimed at determining the tolerance of current diet and fluid recommendations or the suitability for diet and/or fluid upgrade and less inductive reasoning. Consistent with this aim, SLTs' hypotheses were focused primarily on airway protection and medical status during the follow-up phase. Overall, both initial and follow-up swallowing assessments were targeted primarily at identifying suitable management recommendations, and less so on identifying and formulating diagnoses. None of the patients presented with adverse respiratory and/or swallowing outcomes during admission and following discharge from speech pathology. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: Swallowing assessment and management across the acute-care journey was observed as a high-quality, patient-centred process characterized by iterative cycles of inductive and deductive reasoning. This approach appears to maximize efficiency without compromising the quality of care. The outcomes of this research encourage further investigation and translation to tertiary and post-professional education contexts as a clear understanding of the processes involved in reaching diagnoses and management recommendations can inform career-long refinement of clinical skills. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject SLTs' clinical reasoning processes during initial CSE employ iterative cycles of inductive and deductive reasoning, reflecting a patient-centred assessment process. To date it is unknown how SLTs engage in clinical reasoning during follow-up assessments of swallowing function, how they assess the appropriateness of initial management recommendations and how this relates to patient outcomes. What this paper adds to the existing knowledge Our longitudinal evaluation of clinical reasoning and decision-making patterns related to swallowing management in acute care demonstrated that SLTs tailored their processes to each patient's presentation. There was an emphasis on monitoring the suitability of the initial management recommendations and the potential for upgrade of diet or compensatory swallowing strategies. The iterative cycles of inductive and deductive reasoning reflect efficient decision-making processes that maintain high-quality clinical care within the acute environment. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? Employing efficient and high-quality clinical reasoning is a hallmark of good dysphagia practice in maximizing positive patient outcomes. Developing approaches to understanding and making explicit clinical reasoning processes of experienced clinicians may assist SLTs of all developmental stages to provide high standards of care.

Integrated virtual simulation and face-to-face simulation for clinical judgment training among undergraduate nursing students: a mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: Virtual simulation and face-to-face simulation are effective for clinical judgment training. Rare studies have tried to improve clinical judgment ability by applying virtual simulation and face-to-face simulation together. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of an integrated non-immersive virtual simulation and high-fidelity face-to-face simulation program on enhancing nursing students' clinical judgment ability and understanding of nursing students' experiences of the combined simulation. METHODS: A sequential exploratory mixed-methods study was conducted in a nursing simulation center of a university in Central China. Third-year nursing students (n = 122) taking clinical training in ICUs were subsequentially assigned to the integrated non-immersive virtual simulation and high-fidelity face-to-face simulation program arm (n = 61) or the face-to-face simulation-only arm (n = 61) according to the order in which they entered in ICU training. Clinical judgment ability was measured by the Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric (LCJR). Focus group interviews were conducted to gather qualitative data. RESULTS: Students in both arms demonstrated significant improvement in clinical judgment ability scores after simulation, and students in the integrated arm reported more improvement than students in the face-to-face simulation-only arm. The qualitative quotes provided a context for the quantitative improvement measured by the LJCR in the integrated arm. Most of the quantitative findings were confirmed by qualitative findings, including the domains and items in the LJCR. The findings verified and favored the effect of the combination of non-immersive virtual simulation and high-fidelity face-to-face simulation integrated program on enhancing nursing students' clinical judgment ability. CONCLUSIONS: The integrated virtual simulation and face-to-face simulation program was feasible and enhanced nursing students' self-reported clinical judgment ability. This integrated non-immersive virtual simulation and high-fidelity face-to-face simulation program may benefit nursing students and newly graduated nurses in the ICU more than face-to-face simulation only.

Exploring medical students' perceptions of individual and group-based clinical reasoning with virtual patients: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Virtual Patients are computer-based simulations used to teach and evaluate patient interviews, medical diagnoses, and treatment of medical conditions. It helps develop clinical reasoning skills, especially in undergraduate medical education. This study aimed to and investigate the medical students' perceptions of individual and group-based clinical reasoning and decision-making processes by using Virtual Patients. METHODS: The study group comprised 24 third-year medical students. Body Interact® software was utilized as a VP tool. The students' readiness and the courses' learning goals were considered when choosing the scenarios. Semi-structured interview forms were employed for data collection. MAXQDA 2020 qualitative analysis software was used to analyze the data. The students' written answers were analyzed using content analysis. RESULTS: The participants perceived individual applications as beneficial when making clinical decisions with Virtual Patients, but they suggested that group-based applications used with the same cases immediately following individual applications were a more appropriate decision-making method. The results indicated that students learn to make decisions through trial and error, based on software scoring priorities, or using clinical reasoning protocols. CONCLUSION: In group-based reasoning, the discussion-conciliation technique is utilized. The students stated that the individual decision-making was advantageous because it provided students with the freedom to make choices and the opportunity for self-evaluation. On the other hand, they stated that the group based decision-making process activated their prior knowledge, assisted in understanding misconceptions, and promoted information retention. Medical educators need to determine the most appropriate method when using Virtual Patients, which can be structured as individual and/or group applications depending on the competency sought.

Evaluating clinical reasoning in first year DPT students using a script concordance test.

BACKGROUND: A script concordance test (SCT) provides a series of clinical vignettes to assess clinical reasoning in uncertainty. Appraised throughout health education literature, SCTs are cognitive assessments of clinical reasoning, though their use in Doctor of Physical Therapy (DPT) entry-level education has not been investigated. The purpose of this study was to develop and explore the reliability and validity of a SCT for first year DPT students. METHODS: The SCT was developed and implemented over four phases. During phases one and two, DPT program faculty consulted on course content from the first-year curriculum. Thirty clinical vignettes with three follow-up questions each were constructed. The SCT was pilot tested with five clinicians in phase three to assess question clarity. During phase four, the SCT was administered to students and a reference panel via Qualtrics. First year DPT students (n = 44) and reference panel physical therapists with at least two years of experience and advanced certification (n = 15) completed the SCT. Internal consistency was analyzed using Cronbach's Alpha. Differences between student and reference panel percent-correct scores were analyzed with a t-test. Relationships between student SCT scores and academic records were explored with Spearman's Rho. RESULTS: The SCT had an internal consistency of 0.74. A significant difference in scores was found between the students [mean 58.5 (+/-5.31)] and reference panel [65.8 (+/-4.88), p < .01]. No significant correlations between student SCT scores and academic records were found. CONCLUSIONS: The developed SCT was reliable and demonstrated satisfactory internal consistency among test items. The SCT successfully differentiated between groups, with the reference panel demonstrating statistically significant higher percent-correct scores compared to students. SCTs may provide means to measure clinical reasoning in DPT students and lead to novel pedagogical approaches to enhance clinical reasoning.

Virtual patients versus standardized patients for improving clinical reasoning skills in ophthalmology residents. A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: History taking and clinical reasoning are important skills that require knowledge, cognition and meta-cognition. It is important that a trainee must experience multiple encounters with different patients to practice these skills. However, patient safety is also important, and trainees are not allowed to handle critically ill patients. To address this issue, a randomized controlled trial was conducted to determine the effectiveness of using Virtual Patients (VP) versus Standardized Patients (SP) in acquiring clinical reasoning skills in ophthalmology postgraduate residents. METHODS: Postgraduate residents from two hospitals in Lahore, Pakistan, were randomized to either the VP group or the SP group and were exposed to clinical reasoning exercise via the VP or SP for 30 min after the pretest. This was followed by a posttest. One month after this activity, a follow-up posttest was conducted. The data were collected and analysed using IBM-SPSS version 25. Repeated measures ANOVA was used to track the effect of learning skills over time. RESULTS: The mean age of the residents was 28.5 ± 3 years. The male to female ratio was 1:1.1. For the SP group, the mean scores were 12.6 ± 3.08, 16.39 ± 3.01 and 15.39 ± 2.95, and for the VP group, the mean scores were 12.7 ± 3.84, 16.30 ± 3.19 and 15.65 ± 3.18 for the pretest, posttest and follow-up posttest, respectively (p value < 0.00). However, the difference between the VP and SP groups was not statistically significant (p = 0.896). Moreover, there was no statistically significant difference between the VP and SP groups regarding the retention of clinical reasoning ability. In terms of learning gain, compared with the VP group, the SP group had a score of 51.46% immediately after clinical reasoning exercise as compared to VP group, in which it was 49.1%. After one month, it was 38.01 in SP and 40.12% in VP group. CONCLUSION: VPs can be used for learning clinical reasoning skills in postgraduate ophthalmology residents in a safe environment. These devices can be used repeatedly without any risk to the real patient. Although similarly useful, SP is limited by its nonavailability for repeated exercises.

Use of the International IFOMPT Cervical Framework to inform clinical reasoning in postgraduate level physiotherapy students: a qualitative study using think aloud methodology.

BACKGROUND: Vascular pathologies of the head and neck are rare but can present as musculoskeletal problems. The International Federation of Orthopedic Manipulative Physical Therapists (IFOMPT) Cervical Framework (Framework) aims to assist evidence-based clinical reasoning for safe assessment and management of the cervical spine considering potential for vascular pathology. Clinical reasoning is critical to physiotherapy, and developing high-level clinical reasoning is a priority for postgraduate (post-licensure) educational programs. OBJECTIVE: To explore the influence of the Framework on clinical reasoning processes in postgraduate physiotherapy students. METHODS: Qualitative case study design using think aloud methodology and interpretive description, informed by COnsolidated criteria for REporting Qualitative research. Participants were postgraduate musculoskeletal physiotherapy students who learned about the Framework through standardized delivery. Two cervical spine cases explored clinical reasoning processes. Coding and analysis of transcripts were guided by Elstein's diagnostic reasoning components and the Postgraduate Musculoskeletal Physiotherapy Practice model. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis (inductive and deductive) for individuals and then across participants, enabling analysis of key steps in clinical reasoning processes and use of the Framework. Trustworthiness was enhanced with multiple strategies (e.g., second researcher challenged codes). RESULTS: For all participants (n = 8), the Framework supported clinical reasoning using primarily hypothetico-deductive processes. It informed vascular hypothesis generation in the patient history and testing the vascular hypothesis through patient history questions and selection of physical examination tests, to inform clarity and support for diagnosis and management. Most participant's clinical reasoning processes were characterized by high-level features (e.g., prioritization), however there was a continuum of proficiency. Clinical reasoning processes were informed by deep knowledge of the Framework integrated with a breadth of wider knowledge and supported by a range of personal characteristics (e.g., reflection). CONCLUSIONS: Findings support use of the Framework as an educational resource in postgraduate physiotherapy programs to inform clinical reasoning processes for safe and effective assessment and management of cervical spine presentations considering potential for vascular pathology. Individualized approaches may be required to support students, owing to a continuum of clinical reasoning proficiency. Future research is required to explore use of the Framework to inform clinical reasoning processes in learners at different levels.

Fostering clinical reasoning ability in preclinical students through an illness script worksheet approach in flipped learning: a quasi-experimental 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. CONCLUSION: 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.

Enhancing clinical reasoning for management of non-communicable diseases: virtual patient cases as a learning strategy for nurses in primary healthcare centers: a pre-post study design.

BACKGROUND: In Rwanda, nurses manage all primary care at health centres, and therefore are their clinical reasoning skills important. In this study, a web-based software that allows the creation of virtual patient cases (VP cases) has been used for studying the possibility of using VP cases for the continuous professional development of nurses in primary health care in Rwanda. Previous studies in pre-service education have linked VP cases with the enhancement of clinical reasoning, a critical competence for nurses. This study investigated the feasibility of continuous professional development through VP cases to further train in-service nurses in clinical reasoning. METHOD: The study used a pre-post test design. Initially, seventy-six participants completed a questionnaire as part of the pre-test phase, subsequently invited to engage with all four VP cases, and finally responded to the post-test questionnaire evaluating clinical reasoning skills. Fifty-six participants successfully completed the entire study process and were considered in the analysis. The primary outcomes of this study were evaluated using a paired t-test for the statistical analysis. RESULTS: The results show that the mean score of clinical reasoning increased significantly from the pre-test to the post-test for all four illness areas (p < 0.001). The study findings showed no statistically significant difference in participants' scores based on demographic factors, including whether they worked in urban or rural areas.  CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION: Utilizing VP cases appears to significantly enhance the continuous professional development of nurses, fostering a deliberate learning process that enables them to reflect on how they manage cases and, in turn, refine their clinical reasoning skills. This study strongly recommends incorporating VP cases in the continuous professional development of nurses at the primary health level (health centers). This is especially pertinent in a context where nurses are required to perform diagnostic processes similar to those employed by physicians.

Current status and ongoing needs for the teaching and assessment of clinical reasoning - an international mixed-methods study from the students` and teachers` perspective.

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.

Knowledge, Attitude, and Practice (KAP) Status toward Clinical Reasoning and Evidence-Based Medicine among the Medical Interns and Gynecology Residents of Iran University of Medical Sciences.

Background: Clinical reasoning and evidence-based medicine (EBM) are important concepts in modern medicine. Objective: We performed this study to investigate the knowledge, attitude, and practice (KAP) status toward clinical reasoning and EBM among the medical interns and gynecology resident physicians of Iran University of Medical Sciences and related factors. Methods: A cross-sectional study (Tehran, Iran, first half of 2022) was conducted based on two researcher-made questionnaires consisting of three components for each including clinical reasoning attitude (CR-A), clinical reasoning knowledge (CR-K), clinical reasoning practice (CR-P), EBM attitude (EBM-A), EBM knowledge (EBM-K), and EBM practice (EBM-P). The related factors were age, gender, educational level, score of general practice education, having research experience, and general practice experience. Results: A total of 60 individuals participated. The mean score was good for CR-A, moderate for CR-K, moderate for CR-P, good for EBM-A, moderate for EBM-K, and moderate for EBM-P. The total score was moderate in both clinical reasoning and EBM. Among the related factors, CR-P was associated with higher educational levels and having experience in general practice (P < 0.05). Research experience was associated with better CR-K and all KAP components for EBM (P < 0.05). Conclusion: The total score and many of the KAP components had moderate status for clinical reasoning and EBM. Planning on the associated factors should be regarded in the future. Such questionnaires are suggested to be validated for use in quasi-experimental studies.

[Clinical Judgement and Relational Competence in the Psychotherapy of Older Patients]. / Klinische Urteilsbildung und Beziehungskompetenz in der Psychotherapie älterer PatientInnen.

The negative attitude of psychotherapists towards the treatment of older patients in the past has weakened in the recent past. Nevertheless, the question remains as to how therapists perceive older patients in comparison to younger patients, what clinical judgements they arrive at and how they perceive the relationship with them. In the present study, which was conducted as part of the ÄPP study (Older Patients in Psychotherapy), therapists were asked to assess a self-selected younger (<40 years) or an older patient (>65) with regard to various variables. A total of 527 completed questionnaires were available. Two-factor analyses of variance were used to show, among other things, that younger therapists (compared to their older colleagues) rate older patients more negatively in terms of suitability for psychotherapy, the patient's ability to establish a therapeutic working relationship and other parameters. In comparison with their older colleagues, younger therapists perceive themselves as less competent in their relationships with older patients. There are only slight differences with younger patients.

Characterization of the supervision of clinical reasoning by nurse anesthetists with student nurse anesthetists: a qualitative study / Caractérisation de la supervision du raisonnement clinique par les infirmiers anesthésistes auprès des étudiants infirmiers anesthésistes : une étude qualitative.

Introduction: Errors in reasoning are the main causes of poor decision-making in clinical practice. To remedy this, many studies highlight the importance of supervising clinical reasoning during medical internships. Although decision-making is an ongoing process at all key moments of the perioperative period, there are no studies on the supervision of clinical reasoning during student nurse anesthetist internships. The objective of this study was to identify the characteristics of the supervision of clinical reasoning by anesthesia professionals with student nurse anesthetists. Methodology: A multicenter qualitative study was carried out using observations and individual interviews with five nurse anesthetists and five students. Results: Three themes are identified : the characteristics of the learner's and supervisor's posture ; the teaching methods used ; and the specificities of clinical reasoning. Analysis: The nurse anesthetists question clinical reasoning only when they detect difficulties in the student. However, no traceability is carried out. Students spontaneously verbalize their clinical reasoning when unexpected events occur. Discussion: The results will be used as a basis for a new tool for tracing learning during internships.

Introduction: Les erreurs de raisonnement sont les principales causes de mauvaise prise de décision en clinique. Pour y remédier, de nombreuses études montrent l'importance de la supervision du raisonnement clinique pendant les stages en médecine. Bien que la prise de décision soit permanente lors de tous les moments clés de la période péri-opératoire, il n'existe aucune étude sur la supervision du raisonnement clinique durant les stages des étudiants infirmiers anesthésistes. L'objectif de cette étude est d'identifier les caractéristiques de la supervision du raisonnement clinique par les professionnels d'anesthésie auprès des étudiants infirmiers anesthésistes. Méthodologie: Une étude qualitative multicentrique a été réalisée à l'aide d'observations et d'entretiens individuels auprès de cinq infirmiers anesthésistes et cinq étudiants. Résultats: Les trois thèmes identifiés sont les caractéristiques de la posture de l'apprenant et du superviseur, les méthodes pédagogiques utilisées et les spécificités du raisonnement clinique. Analyse: Les infirmiers anesthésistes questionnent le raisonnement clinique uniquement quand ils détectent des difficultés chez l'étudiant ; cependant, aucune traçabilité n'est réalisée. Les étudiants verbalisent spontanément leur raisonnement clinique lors d'événements imprévus. Discussion: Les résultats serviront de base à un nouvel outil de traçabilité des apprentissages en stage.

A GP's clinical reasoning in the context of multimorbidity: beyond the perception of an intuitive approach.

INTRODUCTION: GP's clinical reasoning processes in the context of patients suffering from multimorbidity are often a process which remains implicit. Therefore, the goal of this case study analysis is to gain a better understanding of the processes at play in the management of patients suffering from multimorbidity. METHODS: A case study analysis, using a qualitative thematic analysis was conducted. This case follows a 54-year-old woman who has been under the care of her GP for almost 10 years and suffers from a number of chronic conditions. The clinical reasoning of an experienced GP who can explicitly unfold his processes was chosen for this case analysis. RESULTS: Four main themes emerged from this case analysis: The different roles that GPs have to manage; the GP's cognitive flexibility and continual adaptation of their clinical reasoning processes, the patient's empowerment, and the challenges related to the collaboration with specialists and healthcare professionals. CONCLUSION: This could help GPs gain a clearer understanding of their clinical reasoning processes and motivate them to communicate their findings with others during clinical supervision or teaching. Furthermore, this may emphasize the importance of valuing the role of the primary care physician in the management of multimorbid patients.