Minding the gap: towards a shared clinical reasoning lexicon across the pre-clerkship/clerkship transition.

Teaching and learning of clinical reasoning are core principles of medical education. However, little guidance exists for faculty leaders to navigate curricular transitions between pre-clerkship and clerkship curricular phases. This study compares how educational leaders in these two phases understand clinical reasoning instruction. Previously reported cross-sectional surveys of pre-clerkship clinical skills course directors, and clerkship leaders were compared. Comparisons focused on perceived importance of a number of core clinical reasoning concepts, barriers to clinical reasoning instruction, level of familiarity across the undergraduate medical curriculum, and inclusion of clinical reasoning instruction in each area of the curriculum. Analyses were performed using the Mann Whitney U test. Both sets of leaders rated lack of curricular time as the largest barrier to teaching clinical reasoning. Clerkship leaders also noted a lack of faculty with skills to teach clinical reasoning concepts as a significant barrier (p < 0.02), while pre-clerkship leaders were more likely to perceive that these concepts were too advanced for their students (p < 0.001). Pre-clerkship leaders reported a higher level of familiarity with the clerkship curriculum than clerkship leaders reported of the pre-clerkship curriculum (p < 0.001). As faculty transition students from the pre-clerkship to the clerkship phase, a shared understanding of what is taught and when, accompanied by successful faculty development, may aid the development of longitudinal, milestone-based clinical reasoning instruction.

Assessment of Clinical Reasoning in Undergraduate Medical Education: A Pragmatic Approach to Programmatic Assessment.

PURPOSE: Clinical reasoning, a complex construct integral to the practice of medicine, has been challenging to define, teach, and assess. Programmatic assessment purports to overcome validity limitations of judgments made from individual assessments through proportionality and triangulation processes. This study explored a pragmatic approach to the programmatic assessment of clinical reasoning. METHOD: The study analyzed data from 2 student cohorts from the University of Utah School of Medicine (UUSOM) (n = 113 in cohort 1 and 119 in cohort 2) and 1 cohort from the University of Colorado School of Medicine (CUSOM) using assessment data that spanned from 2017 to 2021 (n = 199). The study methods included the following: (1) asking faculty judges to categorize student clinical reasoning skills, (2) selecting institution-specific assessment data conceptually aligned with clinical reasoning, (3) calculating correlations between assessment data and faculty judgments, and (4) developing regression models between assessment data and faculty judgments. RESULTS: Faculty judgments of student clinical reasoning skills were converted to a continuous variable of clinical reasoning struggles, with mean (SD) ratings of 2.93 (0.27) for the 232 UUSOM students and 2.96 (0.17) for the 199 CUSOM students. A total of 67 and 32 discrete assessment variables were included from the UUSOM and CUSOM, respectively. Pearson r correlations were moderate to strong between many individual and composite assessment variables and faculty judgments. Regression models demonstrated an overall adjusted R2 (standard error of the estimate) of 0.50 (0.19) for UUSOM cohort 1, 0.28 (0.15) for UUSOM cohort 2, and 0.30 (0.14) for CUSOM. CONCLUSIONS: This study represents an early pragmatic exploration of regression analysis as a potential tool for operationalizing the proportionality and triangulation principles of programmatic assessment. The study found that programmatic assessment may be a useful framework for longitudinal assessment of complicated constructs, such as clinical reasoning.

Perspectives on the current state of pre-clerkship clinical reasoning instruction in United States medical schools: a survey of clinical skills course directors.

OBJECTIVES: Clinical reasoning skills are essential for sound medical decision-making. Though many have suggested that clinical reasoning instruction should begin in pre-clerkship curricula, neither pre-clerkship clinical skills director perspectives nor extent of instruction is known. This survey study serves as part of a needs assessment for United States medical school pre-clerkship clinical reasoning curricula. METHODS: United States medical school pre-clerkship clinical skills course directors were surveyed about perceived importance of formal instruction on clinical reasoning concepts, inclusion of these concepts in the curricula, barriers to instruction, and familiarity with clerkship curricula. Results were analyzed using descriptive and analytic statistics. Narrative comments were analyzed qualitatively for themes. RESULTS: Of 148 directors surveyed, 102 (69%) participated and 89 (60%) completed all closed-ended items. Each clinical reasoning concept was identified as somewhat to extremely important to include in pre-clerkship curricula by 90-99% of respondents. Pre-clerkship curricula included variable degrees of formal instruction for concepts, though most respondents rated their inclusion as moderate or extensive. Perceived importance of teaching most concepts moderately correlated with the degree of inclusion in the curriculum (Spearman's rho 0.39-0.44). Curricular time constraints and lack of faculty with skills to teach these concepts were the most frequently cited barriers to instruction. Respondents indicated being somewhat 57% (n=54) to extremely 29% (n=27) familiar with clerkship curricula at their institutions. CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first to examine pre-clerkship clinical skills course director perspectives about clinical reasoning instruction and extent of its inclusion in their curricula.

The learning community faculty experience: how longitudinal relationships with learners enhance work meaning.

INTRODUCTION: Work meaning has gained attention as an important contributor to physician job engagement and well-being but little is known about how faculty participation in medical school learning communities might influence this phenomena. Our study goals were to determine how physician faculty members may derive meaning from serving as mentors for longitudinal learning communities of medical students, to understand how that meaning may impact other areas of their work, and relate our findings to existing literature and theoretical frameworks. METHODS: The research team conducted, recorded, transcribed, and coded 25 semi-structured telephone interviews of faculty mentors from four US medical schools with curricular learning communities. The team used an iterative interview coding process to generate final themes and relate these themes to existing literature. RESULTS: The authors identified five themes of meaning faculty derive from participation as learning community mentors: "I am a better professional," "I am more connected," "I am rejuvenated," "I am contributing," and "I am honored." A sixth theme, "I am harmed," encompassed the negative aspects of the learning community faculty experience. The authors found that their identified themes related closely to the theoretical framework for pathways to meaningful work proposed by Rosso et al. DISCUSSION: The alignment of the themes we identified on the experience of learning community faculty to existing literature on work meaning corroborates the theoretical framework and deepens understanding of beneficial and harmful learning community effects on faculty. As learning communities become increasingly common within medical schools, this understanding may be important for leaders in academic medicine considering potential indirect benefits of this educational model.

Learning from failure: how eliminating required attendance sparked the beginning of a medical school transformation.

Concern about medical student attendance has been rising over the last decade. Thinking a required attendance policy would fix things, we instituted such a mandate in 2010 only to find that although students were present at lecture and other learning sessions they were disengaged. In addition, we experienced growing distrust between faculty and students and tensions between the Student Affairs and Curriculum offices. After five years, we dismantled the policy in favor of encouraged attendance. We discuss both positive and negative surprising consequences that followed this new approach to attendance which has reshaped our vision for the medical school learning experience. It has been transformative and has afforded us the opportunity to redefine our results in accord with the culture in which we aspire to live and work.

Evaluation of a Preclerkship Learning Community Model for Delivering Clinical Skills Curriculum.

BACKGROUND: Medical schools are increasingly using learning communities (LCs) for clinical skills curriculum delivery despite little research on LCs employed for this purpose. We evaluated an LC model compared with a non-LC model for preclerkship clinical skills curriculum using Kirkpatrick's hierarchy as an evaluation framework. METHODS: The first LC cohort's (N = 101; matriculating Fall 2013) reaction to the LC model was assessed with self-reported surveys. Change in skills and learning transfer to clerkships was measured with objective structured clinical examinations (OSCEs) at the end of years 2 and 3 and first and last clerkship preceptor evaluations; the LC cohort and the prior cohort (N = 86; matriculating Fall 2012) that received clinical skills instruction in a non-LC format were compared with Mann-Whitney U tests. RESULTS: The LC model for preclerkship clinical skills curriculum was rated as excellent or good by 96% of respondents in Semesters 1 to 3 (N = 95). Across multiple performance domains, 96% to 99% of students were satisfied to very satisfied with their LC faculty preceptors (N varied by item). For the end of preclerkship OSCE, the LC cohort scored higher than the non-LC cohort in history gathering (P = .003, d = 0.50), physical examination (P = .019, d = 0.32), and encounter documentation (P ⩽ .001, d = 0.47); the non-LC cohort scored higher than the LC cohort in communication (P = .001, d = 0.43). For the end of year 3 OSCE, the LC cohort scored higher than the non-LC cohort in history gathering (P = .006, d = 0.50) and encounter note documentation (P = .027, d = 0.24); there was no difference in physical examination or communication scores between cohorts. There was no detectable difference between LC and non-LC student performance on the preceptor evaluation forms at either the beginning or end of the clerkship curriculum. CONCLUSIONS: We observed limited performance improvements for LC compared with non-LC students on the end of the preclerkship OSCE but not on the clerkship preceptor evaluations. Additional studies of LC models for clinical skills curriculum delivery are needed to further elucidate their impact on the professional development of medical students.

To What Degree Are the 13 Entrustable Professional Activities Already Incorporated Into Physicians' Performance Schemas for Medical Students?

Phenomenon: There is an abundance of literature on Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs) in theory, but there are few studies on the EPAs in practice for undergraduate clinical education. In addition, little is known about the degree to which the EPAs are or are not aligned with physician assessors' performance schemas of the clerkship student. Investigating the degree to which physician assessors' performance schemas are already aligned with the activities described by the EPAs is critical for effective workplace assessment design. Approach: We sampled 1,032 areas of strength (strength) and areas for improvement (improvement) written evaluation comments by 423 physician assessors for clerkship students' performance in academic years 2014-15 and 2015-16 at the University of Utah School of Medicine. Two researchers independently categorized each comment by EPA and/or coded by non-EPA topic. The proportion of comment types was compared between strength comments and improvement comments with the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test. Findings: The most frequently mentioned EPAs in comments were about history gathering/physical exam, differential diagnosis, documentation, presentation, and interprofessional collaboration; few mentioned diagnostic tests, patient handovers, recognition of urgent patient care, and patient safety, and none mentioned orders/prescriptions and informed consent. The most frequent non-EPA topics were about medical knowledge, need to read more, learning attitude, work ethic, professionalism/maturity, and receptiveness to feedback. The proportion of comments aligned with an EPA only, a non-EPA topic only, or both an EPA and non-EPA topic was significantly different for clerkship students' strength compared to improvement. Insights: Physician assessors' performance schemas for clerkship students were aligned with EPAs to varying degrees depending on the specific EPA and whether describing strength or improvement. Of interest, the frequently mentioned non-EPA comments represented some of the competencies that contribute to effectively performing particular EPAs and are Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) core competencies (e.g., medical knowledge, professionalism), used in residency programs. Because physician assessors for undergraduate medical education often also participate in graduate medical education, the frequency of non-EPA topics aligned to ACGME competencies may suggest influence of graduate medical education evaluative frameworks on performance schemas for clerkship students; this could be important when considering implementation of EPAs in undergraduate medical education.

Diagnosing and Remediating Clinical Reasoning Difficulties: A Faculty Development Workshop.

Introduction: Clinical reasoning is a complex cognitive process that involves multiple steps. Diagnosing and remediating clinical reasoning difficulties requires faculty to have an understanding of the cognitive theory behind clinical reasoning, familiarity with terminology, and a framework to identify different domains of struggle in their learners. Published resources on faculty development to diagnose and remediate clinical reasoning difficulties are limited. We created and implemented a workshop to assist faculty in developing these skills based on the five-domain framework described by Audétat, Laurin, and Sanche. This workshop provides all the materials needed to replicate this training with faculty at other institutions. Methods: The workshop consists of a didactic component and case-based active learning in small groups. Each case focuses on different domains of clinical reasoning difficulties and targets different learner levels (preclinical medical students through residents). The workshop was given in multiple venues in 2016 and 2017. Results: Participants reported the session was valuable (4.71/5.0), the facilitators were effective (4.5/5.0), and the objectives were met (4.28/5.0). They highlighted the strengths of the interactive format, the framework to diagnose and remediate clinical reasoning difficulties, and the excellent take-home resources. They suggested more time for the workshop, revision of cases to better highlight difficulties, and refinement of instructions to approach the cases. These suggestions were incorporated into the current iteration of the workshop. Discussion: We successfully implemented a workshop for diagnosing and remediating clinical reasoning difficulties in multiple venues. The sessions were diverse in terms of faculty participants and learner groups addressed.

What's in a Transition? An Integrative Perspective on Transitions in Medical Education.

This Conversation Starters article presents a selected research abstract from the 2016 Association of American Medical Colleges Western Region Group on Educational Affairs annual spring meeting. The abstract is paired with the integrative commentary of three experts who shared their thoughts stimulated by the needs assessment study. These thoughts explore how the general theoretical mechanisms of transition may be integrated with cognitive load theory in order to design interventions and environments that foster transition.