Concordance of judgement: A tool to foster the development of professionalism in dentistry.

INTRODUCTION: Developing professionalism notably involves learning how to make professional judgements in ambiguous situations. The Concordance of Judgement Test (CJT) is a learning tool that was proposed to develop professionalism competencies, but it was never performed in dentistry or used with a synchronous methodology. The present study evaluated the feasibility of the use of CJT in the context of dental education, to foster professionalism and stimulate reflexivity and discussion. MATERIALS AND METHODS: After different steps of optimization, a questionnaire presenting 12 vignettes was submitted to 33 Canadian students. Second, after an additional optimization, a questionnaire of 7 vignettes was submitted to 87 French students. An immediate educational feedback was proposed after each vignette to promote reflexivity and discussions during the experience. RESULTS: The overall experience of the students was reported as good, thanks to the feedback of real-life situations. This promoted reflexivity and stimulated discussion between students and educators regarding professionalism issues. The students considered CJT as a relevant and well-adapted tool, and reported positive feelings regarding the inter-university aspect of the activity. The mean score of the panel members was close to 80/100 and the mean score of the students was 5 to 10 points lower, which is in agreement with docimological performance. CONCLUSION: The results suggested that the use of CJT in a synchronous way was a feasible and relevant tool to motivate the students to improve their professionalism, and to stimulate their reflexivity and discussion. The students reported positive experience with CJT, and we believe that this tool can be integrated in the dental curriculum.

What can Designing Learning-by-Concordance Clinical Reasoning Cases Teach Us about Instruction in the Health Sciences?

Introduction: Learning-by-concordance (LbC) is an online learning strategy to practice reasoning skills in clinical situations. Writing LbC clinical cases, comprising an initial hypothesis and supplementary data, differs from typical instructional design. We sought to gain a deeper understanding from experienced LbC designers to better support clinician educators' broader uptake of LbC. Methods: A dialogic action research approach was selected because it yields triangulated data from a heterogeneous group. We conducted three 90-minute dialogue-group sessions with eight clinical educators. Discussions focused on the challenges and pitfalls of each LbC design stage described in the literature. Recordings were transcribed and analyzed thematically. Results: We identified three themes by thematic analysis about the challenges inherent in designing LbC that are unique for this type of learning strategy: 1) the distinction between pedagogical intent and learning outcome; 2) the contextual cues used to challenge students and advance their learning and 3) the integration of experiential with formalized knowledge for cognitive apprenticeship. Discussion: A clinical situation can be experienced and conceptualized in many ways, and multiple responses are appropriate. LbC designers use contextual cues from their experience and combine them with formalized knowledge and protocols to write effective LbC clinical reasoning cases. LbC focuses learners' attention on decision-making in grey areas that characterize the nature of professional clinical work. This in-depth study on LbC design, indicating the integration of experiential knowledge, might call for new thinking about instructional design.

The Student-Generated Reasoning Tool (SGRT): Linking medical knowledge and clinical reasoning in preclinical education.

INTRODUCTION: The simultaneous integration of knowledge acquisition and development of clinical reasoning in preclinical medical education remains a challenge. To help address this challenge, the authors developed and implemented the Student-Generated Reasoning Tool (SGRT)-a tool asking students to propose and justify pathophysiological hypotheses, generate findings, and critically appraise information. METHODS: In 2019, students in a first-year preclinical course (n = 171; SGRT group) were assigned to one of 20 teams. Students used the SGRT individually, then in teams, and faculty provided feedback. The control group (n = 168) consisted of students from 2018 who did not use SGRT. Outcomes included academic performance, effectiveness of collaborative environments using the SGRT, and student feedback. RESULTS: Students were five times more likely to get questions correct if they were in the SGRT group versus control group. Accuracy of pathophysiological hypotheses was significantly lower for individuals than teams. Qualitative analysis indicated students benefited from generating their own data, justifying their reasoning, and working individually as well as in teams. CONCLUSIONS: This study introduces the SGRT as a potentially engaging, case-based, and collaborative learning method that may help preclinical medical students become aware of their knowledge gaps and integrate their knowledge in basic and clinical sciences in the context of clinical reasoning.

Assessing the acceptability of script concordance testing: a nationwide study in otolaryngology.

Background: Script concordance testing (SCT) is an objective method to evaluate clinical reasoning that assesses the ability to interpret medical information under conditions of uncertainty. Many studies have supported its validity as a tool to assess higher levels of learning, but little is known about its acceptability to major stakeholders. The aim of this study was to determine the acceptability of SCT to residents in otolaryngology ­ head and neck surgery (OTL-HNS) and a reference group of experts. Methods: In 2013 and 2016, a set of SCT questions, as well a post-test exit survey, were included in the National In-Training Examination (NITE) for OTL-HNS. This examination is administered to all OTL-HNS residents across Canada who are in the second to fifth year of residency. The same SCT questions and survey were then sent to a group of OTL-HNS surgeons from 4 Canadian universities. Results: For 64.4% of faculty and residents, the study was their first exposure to SCT. Overall, residents found it difficult to adapt to this form of testing, thought that the clinical scenarios were not clear and believed that SCT was not useful for assessing clinical reasoning. In contrast, the vast majority of experts felt that the test questions reflected real-life clinical situations and would recommend SCT as an evaluation method in OTL-HNS. Conclusion: Views about the acceptability of SCT as an assessment tool for clinical reasoning differed between OTL-HNS residents and experts. Education about SCT and increased exposure to this testing method are necessary to improve residents' perceptions of SCT.

Contexte: Le test de concordance de script (TCS) est une méthode objective d'évaluation du raisonnement clinique qui mesure la capacité d'interpréter les renseignements médicaux en contexte d'incertitude. Beaucoup d'études en appuient la validité en tant qu'outil pour évaluer l'enseignement supérieur, mais on en sait peu sur son acceptabilité auprès des principales parties prenantes. Le but de cette étude était de déterminer l'acceptabilité du TCS chez les résidents en otorhinolaryngologie ­ chirurgie de la tête et du cou (ORL ­ chirurgie tête et cou) et un groupe de référence composé d'experts. Méthodes: En 2013 et 2016, une série de questions de TCS, de même qu'un questionnaire post-test, ont été inclus dans l'examen national en cours de formation NITE (National In-Training Examination) pour l'ORL ­ chirurgie tête et cou. Cet examen est administré à tous les résidents en ORL ­ chirurgie tête et cou au Canada qui sont entre leurs deuxième et cinquième années de résidence. Les mêmes questions de TCS ont été envoyées à un groupe de chirurgiens en ORL ­ chirurgie tête et cou de 4 université canadiennes. Résultats: Pour 64,4 % des membres facultaires et des résidents, l'étude était leur première exposition au TCS. Dans l'ensemble, les résidents ont trouvé difficile de s'adapter à cette forme de test, même si les scénarios cliniques étaient clairs, et ils ont estimé que le TCS était peu utile pour évaluer le raisonnement clinique. En revanche, la grande majorité des experts ont jugé que les questions du test reflétaient la réalité des cas cliniques et recommanderaient le TCS comme méthode d'évaluation en ORL ­ chirurgie tête et cou. Conclusion: Entre les résidents et les experts en ORL ­ chirurgie tête et cou, les points de vue quant à l'acceptabilité du TCS comme outil d'évaluation du raisonnement clinique ont différé et il faudrait y exposer les résidents davantage pour améliorer leur perception du TCS.

Learning by concordance (LbC) to develop professional reasoning skills: AMEE Guide No. 141.

Developing effective clinical reasoning is central to health professions education. Learning by concordance (LbC) is an on-line educational strategy that makes learners practice reasoning competency in case-based clinical situations. The questions asked are similar to those professionals ask themselves in their practice and participant answers are compared to those of a reference panel. When participants answer the questions, they receive an automated feedback that is two-fold as they see (1) how the panelists respond and (2) justifications each panelist gives for their answer. This provides rich contextual knowledge about the situation, supplemented by a synthesis summarizing crucial points. As many educators in the health sciences are engaging in introducing innovative approaches, many consider building LbC learning modules. Elaborating, designing and implementing a LbC tool remain a challenge. This AMEE Guide describes the steps and elements to be considered when designing a LbC tool, drawing on examples from distinct health professions: medicine, nursing, physiotherapy, and dentistry. Specifically, the following elements will be discussed: (1) LbC theoretical underpinnings; (2) principles of LbC questioning; (3) goals of the concordance-based activity; (4) nature of reasoning tasks; (5) content/levels of complexity; (6) reference panel; (7) feedback/synthesis messages; (8) on-line learning platforms.

Assessing decision-making in education of restorative and prosthetic dentistry: a pilot study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate whether a concordance assessment (CA) software application is able to assess decision-making in restorative and prosthetic dentistry. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Vignettes representing 10 different clinical situations were integrated into a software application. Each vignette included 3D digital models and a short case, as well as 5 therapeutic options rated on a 4-point Likert scale (-2 = strongly contraindicated; -1 = contraindicated; +1 = indicated; +2 = strongly indicated). A panel of 15 dental educators (9 educators from the prosthetic department [PD] and 6 from the conservative department [CD]) had to evaluate the indication of each of the 5 therapies for the 10 vignettes. RESULTS: This pilot questionnaire showed good internal consistency on most therapies (Cronbach's α = 0.86), with the exception of more recently introduced therapies (overlay/veneerlay and endocrown). On a maximum score out of 100, the average of CD educators (79.2 ± 3.2) was not significantly different (P = .73) from that of a PD educator (77.8 ± 3.5). Scores ranged from 66.8 to 89.6. Analysis of the expert panel's responses also reported mostly (34/50) a distribution of responses that was characteristic of CA and uncertain situations. CONCLUSION: The present software application was able to reproduce and assess decision-making in dentistry with satisfying internal consistency of educators.

Teaching clinical reasoning to undergraduate medical students by illness script method: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The illness script method employs a theoretical outline (e.g., epidemiology, pathophysiology, signs and symptoms, diagnostic tests, interventions) to clarify how clinicians organized medical knowledge for clinical reasoning in the diagnosis domain. We hypothesized that an educational intervention based on the illness script method would improve medical students' clinical reasoning skills in the diagnosis domain. METHODS: This study is a randomized controlled trial involving 100 fourth-year medical students in Shiraz Medical School, Iran. Fifty students were randomized to the intervention group, who were taught clinical reasoning skills based on the illness script method for three diseases during one clinical scenario. Another 50 students were randomized to the control group, who were taught the clinical presentation based on signs and symptoms of the same three diseases as the intervention group. The outcomes of interest were learner satisfaction with the intervention and posttest scores on both an internally developed knowledge test and a Script Concordance Test (SCT). RESULTS: Of the hundred participating fourth-year medical students, 47 (47%) were male, and 53 (53%) were female. On the knowledge test, there was no difference in pretest scores between the intervention and control group, which suggested a similar baseline knowledge in both groups; however, posttest scores in the intervention group were (15.74 ± 2.47 out of 20) statistically significantly higher than the control group (14.38 ± 2.59 out of 20, P = 0.009). On the SCT, the mean score for the intervention group (6.12 ± 1.95 out of 10) was significantly higher than the control group (4.54 ± 1.56 out of 10; P = 0.0001). Learner satisfaction data indicated that the intervention was well-received by students. CONCLUSION: Teaching with the illness script method was an effective way to improve students' clinical reasoning skills in the diagnosis domain suggested by posttest and SCT scores for specific clinical scenarios. Whether this approach translates to improved generalized clinical reasoning skills in real clinical settings merits further study.

Script concordance tests: A call for action in dental education.

The Script Concordance Test (SCT) is an educational tool that aims to assess the ability to interpret medical information under conditions of uncertainty. It is widely used and validated in health education, but almost unknown in dentistry. Based on authentic clinical problem-solving situations, it allows to assess clinical reasoning that experienced health workers develop over the years. A specific scoring system, dedicated to SCT, considers the variability of responses of practitioners in the same clinical situations. Finally, the scores generated by SCT reflect the respondents' ability to interpret clinical data compared to experienced clinicians. This article aims to familiarise the dental educators' community with SCT construction, optimisation and its possible applications.

Educators and practitioners' perspectives in the development of a learning by concordance tool for medical clerkship in the context of the COVID pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has forced medical schools to create educational material to palliate the anticipated and observed decrease in clinical experiences during clerkships. An online learning by concordance (LbC) tool was developed to overcome the limitation of students' experiences with clinical cases. However, knowledge about the instructional design of an LbC tool is scarce, especially the perspectives of collaborators involved in its design: 1- educators who wrote the vignettes' questions and 2- practitioners who constitute the reference panel by answering the LbC questions. The aim of this study was to describe the key elements that supported the pedagogical design of an LbC tool from the perspectives of educators and practitioners. METHODS: A descriptive qualitative research design has been used. Online questionnaires were used, and descriptive analysis was conducted. RESULTS: Six educators and 19 practitioners participated in the study. Important to the educators in designing the LbC tool were prevalent or high-stake situations, theoretical knowledge, professional situations experienced and perceived difficulties among students, and that the previous workshop promoted peer discussion and helped solidify the writing process. Important for practitioners was standards of practice and consensus among experts. However, they were uncertain of the educational value of their feedback, considering the ambiguity of the situations included in the LbC tool. CONCLUSIONS: The LbC tool is a relatively new training tool in medical education. Further research is needed to refine our understanding of the design of such a tool and ensure its content validity to meet the pedagogical objectives of the clerkship.

CONTEXTE: Face à la pandémie de la COVID-19, les facultés de médecine ont été contraintes à créer du matériel pédagogique pouvant pallier la diminution prévue et avérée de l'exposition clinique pendant les stages d'externat. Un outil numérique de formation par concordance (FpC) a été développé pour combler le manque d'exposition à des cas cliniques. Cependant, les connaissances sur la conception pédagogique des outils de FpC sont limitées, en particulier en ce qui concerne les perspectives des collaborateurs participant à leur réalisation : 1 ­ les éducateurs qui rédigent les questions des vignettes et 2 ­ les praticiens composant le groupe d'experts qui fournissent les réponses de référence aux questions de FpC. L'objectif de cette étude était de décrire les éléments clés qui ont étayé la conception pédagogique d'un outil FpC du point de vue des éducateurs et des praticiens. MÉTHODES: Il s'agit d'une recherche qualitative de type descriptif, pour laquelle on s'est servi de questionnaires en ligne et d'une méthode d'analyse descriptive. RÉSULTATS: Six éducateurs et 19 praticiens ont participé à l'étude. Dans la conception de l'outil FpC, les éducateurs ont attribué une importance particulière aux situations courantes ou à enjeu élevé, aux connaissances théoriques, aux situations professionnelles vécues par les étudiants et aux difficultés qu'ils ont perçues chez eux. Ils ont également tenu à faire en sorte que l'atelier qui précédait la conception favorise le débat entre pairs et contribue à solidifier le processus de rédaction. Les praticiens ont privilégié les normes de pratique et l'existence d'un consensus entre experts. Cependant, ils doutaient de la valeur pédagogique de leurs commentaires, compte tenu de l'ambiguïté des situations décrites dans l'outil FpC. CONCLUSIONS: Les outils FpC sont relativement nouveaux en éducation médicale. Des recherches plus poussées sont nécessaires pour affiner notre compréhension de la conception d'un tel outil et pour nous assurer de sa validité de contenu, pour bien répondre aux objectifs pédagogiques de l'externat.

Combination of different clinical reasoning tests in a national exam.

INTRODUCTION: Clinical reasoning as a critical and high level of clinical competency should be acquired during medical education, and medical educators should attempt to assess this ability in medical students. Nowadays, there are several ways to evaluate medical students' clinical reasoning ability in different countries worldwide. There are some well-known clinical reasoning tests such as Key Feature (KF), Clinical Reasoning Problem (CRP), Script Concordance Test (SCT), and Comprehensive Integrative Puzzle (CIP). Each of these tests has its advantages and disadvantages. In this study, we evaluated the reliability of combination of clinical reasoning tests SCT, KF, CIP, and CRP in one national exam and the correlation between the subtest scores of these tests together with the total score of the exam. METHODS: In this cross sectional study, a total number of 339 high ranked medical students from 60 medical schools in Iran participated in a national exam named "Medical Olympiad". The ninth Medical Olympiad was held in Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran, under the direct supervision of the Ministry of Health and Medical Education in summer 2017. The expert group designed a combination of four types of clinical reasoning tests to assess both analytical and non-analytical clinical reasoning. Mean scores of SCT, CRP, KF, and CIP were measured using descriptive statistics. Reliability was calculated for each test and the combination of tests using Cronbach's alpha. Spearman's correlation coefficient was used to evaluate the correlation between the score of each subtest and the total score. SPSS version 21 was used for data analysis and the level of significance was considered <0.05. RESULTS: The reliability of the combination of tests was 0.815. The reliability of KF was 0.81 and 0.76, 0.80, and 0.92 for SCT, CRP, and CIP, respectively. The mean total score was 169.921±41.54 from 240. All correlations between each clinical reasoning test and total score were significant (P<0.001). The highest correlation (0.887) was seen between CIP score and total score. CONCLUSION: The study showed that combining different clinical reasoning tests can be a reliable way of measuring this ability.

Development and psychometrics of script concordance test (SCT) in midwifery.

Background: Clinical reasoning plays an important role in the accurate diagnosis and treatment of diseases. Script Concordance test (SCT) is one of the tools that assess clinical reasoning skill. This study was conducted to determine the reliability and concurrent and predictive validity of SCT in assessing final lessons and gynecology exams of undergraduate midwifery students. Methods: At first, 20 clinical scenarios followed by 3 questions were designed by 2 experienced midwives. Then, after examining the content validity, 15 scenarios were selected. The test was used for 55 midwifery students. The correlation of SCT results with grade point average (GPA) was measured. To evaluate the concurrent validity of SCT, the correlation between SCT scores and the final exam of the gynecology course was measured. To measure predictive validity, the correlation of SCT scores with comprehensive exams of midwifery was calculated. Data were analyzed using SPSS software. Descriptive statistics, Pearson correlation, and coefficient Cronbach's alpha were used for analysis. The test's item difficulty level (IDL) and item discriminative index (IDI) were determined using Whitney and Sabers' method. Results: The internal reliability of the test (calculated using Cronbach's alpha coefficient) was 0.74. All questions were positively correlated with the total score. The highest correlation coefficient was related to GPA and comprehensive test with the score of 0.91. The correlation coefficient between SCT and the final test (concurrent validity) was 0.654, and the correlation coefficient between SCT and comprehensive test (predictive validity) was 0.721. The range of item discriminative index and item difficulty level in this exam was 0.39-0.59 and 0.32-0.66, respectively. Conclusion: SCT shows a relatively high internal validity and can predict the success rate of students in the comprehensive exams of midwifery. Also, it showed a high concurrent validity in the final test of gynecology course. This test could be a good alternative for formative and summative tests of clinical courses.

Learning-by-Concordance for Family Physicians: Revealing its Value for Continuing Professional Development in Dermatology.

This article was migrated. The article was marked as recommended. Introduction Continuous Professional Development (CPD) is an important part of a physician's professional life. Yet, providing effective in-service training solutions is a persistent challenge for CPD planners. Methods Primary care physicians are frequently confronted with skin lesionsthey feel ill-prepared to manage. A dermatology Learning-by-concordance (LbC) online activity was developed and offered to family physicians for CPD credit. We were interested in finding out whether this online tool was suitable for CPD. Following a pilot phase, the on-line activity was launched and 45 geographically dispersed primary care physicians completed it. They participated in a telephone conference a week later with an expert to discuss outstanding questions. Evaluation was carried out by a survey that was available immediately after the last case. Results Participants found the on-line training tool user friendly and should be implemented on a larger scale. Participants found the dermatology concepts discussed allowed them to increase their knowledge and apply it to their practice. Discussion Among the strengths of LbC is that the learning task resemble those of a primary physician's daily practice. Finally, our study reveals that LbC is easily integrated in busy work schedules and thus is an effective learning solution for CPD.

Fostering clinical reasoning in physiotherapy: comparing the effects of concept map study and concept map completion after example study in novice and advanced learners.

BACKGROUND: Health profession learners can foster clinical reasoning by studying worked examples presenting fully worked out solutions to a clinical problem. It is possible to improve the learning effect of these worked examples by combining them with other learning activities based on concept maps. This study investigated which combinaison of activities, worked examples study with concept map completion or worked examples study with concept map study, fosters more meaningful learning of intervention knowledge in physiotherapy students. Moreover, this study compared the learning effects of these learning activity combinations between novice and advanced learners. METHODS: Sixty-one second-year physiotherapy students participated in the study which included a pre-test phase, a 130-min guided-learning phase and a four-week self-study phase. During the guided and self-study learning sessions, participants had to study three written worked examples presenting the clinical reasoning for selecting electrotherapeutic currents to treat patients with motor deficits. After each example, participants engaged in either concept map completion or concept map study depending on which learning condition they were randomly allocated to. Students participated in an immediate post-test at the end of the guided-learning phase and a delayed post-test at the end of the self-study phase. Post-tests assessed the understanding of principles governing the domain of knowledge to be learned (conceptual knowledge) and the ability to solve new problems that have similar (i.e., near transfer) or different (i.e., far transfer) solution rationales as problems previously studied in the examples. RESULTS: Learners engaged in concept map completion outperformed those engaged in concept map study on near transfer (p = .010) and far transfer (p < .001) performance. There was a significant interaction effect of learners' prior ability and learning condition on conceptual knowledge but not on near and far transfer performance. CONCLUSIONS: Worked examples study combined with concept map completion led to greater transfer performance than worked examples study combined with concept map study for both novice and advanced learners. Concept map completion might give learners better insight into what they have and have not yet learned, allowing them to focus on those aspects during subsequent example study.

Diagnosis and management of clinical reasoning difficulties: Part II. Clinical reasoning difficulties: Management and remediation strategies.

Part II of this AMEE Guide provides a detailed overview of the main difficulties in clinical reasoning, including the cues to look out for in clinical supervision, the root causes of each difficulty and targeted remediation strategies. Specific challenges and issues related to the management of clinical reasoning difficulties will also be discussed.

Diagnosis and management of clinical reasoning difficulties: Part I. Clinical reasoning supervision and educational diagnosis.

There are many obstacles to the timely identification of clinical reasoning difficulties in health professions education. This guide aims to provide readers with a framework for supervising clinical reasoning and identifying the potential difficulties as they may occur at each step of the reasoning process.

A Novel Approach to Study Medical Decision Making in the Clinical Setting: The "Own-point-of-view" Perspective.

BACKGROUND: Making diagnostic and therapeutic decisions is a critical activity among physicians. It relies on the ability of physicians to use cognitive processes and specific knowledge in the context of a clinical reasoning. This ability is a core competency in physicians, especially in the field of emergency medicine where the rate of diagnostic errors is high. Studies that explore medical decision making in an authentic setting are increasing significantly. They are based on the use of qualitative methods that are applied at two separate times: 1) a video recording of the subject's actual activity in an authentic setting and 2) an interview with the subject, supported by the video recording. Traditionally, activity is recorded from an "external perspective"; i.e., a camera is positioned in the room in which the consultation takes place. This approach has many limits, both technical and with respect to the validity of the data collected. OBJECTIVES: The article aims at 1) describing how decision making is currently being studied, especially from a qualitative standpoint, and the reasons why new methods are needed, and 2) reporting how we used an original, innovative approach to study decision making in the field of emergency medicine and findings from these studies to guide further the use of this method. The method consists in recording the subject's activity from his own point of view, by fixing a microcamera on his temple or the branch of his glasses. An interview is then held on the basis of this recording, so that the subject being interviewed can relive the situation, to facilitate the explanation of his reasoning with respect to his decisions and actions. RESULTS: We describe how this method has been used successfully in investigating medical decision making in emergency medicine. We provide details on how to use it optimally, taking into account the constraints associated with the practice of emergency medicine and the benefits in the study of clinical reasoning. CONCLUSION: The "own-point-of-view" video technique is a promising method to study clinical decision making in emergency medicine. It is a powerful tool to stimulate recall and help physicians make their reasoning explicit, thanks to a greater psychological immersion.

Crossing boundaries in interprofessional education: A call for instructional integration of two script concepts.

Clinical work occurs in a context which is heavily influenced by social interactions. The absence of theoretical frameworks underpinning the design of collaborative learning has become a roadblock for interprofessional education (IPE). This article proposes a script-based framework for the design of IPE. This framework provides suggestions for designing learning environments intended to foster competences we feel are fundamental to successful interprofessional care. The current literature describes two script concepts: "illness scripts" and "internal/external collaboration scripts". Illness scripts are specific knowledge structures that link general disease categories and specific examples of diseases. "Internal collaboration scripts" refer to an individual's knowledge about how to interact with others in a social situation. "External collaboration scripts" are instructional scaffolds designed to help groups collaborate. Instructional research relating to illness scripts and internal collaboration scripts supports (a) putting learners in authentic situations in which they need to engage in clinical reasoning, and (b) scaffolding their interaction with others with "external collaboration scripts". Thus, well-established experiential instructional approaches should be combined with more fine-grained script-based scaffolding approaches. The resulting script-based framework offers instructional designers insights into how students can be supported to develop the necessary skills to master complex interprofessional clinical situations.

In Brief: Validity of Case Summaries in Written Examinations of Clinical Reasoning.

Construct: The purpose of this study was to provide initial evidence of the validity of written case summaries as assessments of clinical problem representation in a classroom setting. BACKGROUND: To solve clinical problems, clinicians must gain a clear representation of the issues. In the clinical setting, oral case presentations-or summaries-are used to assess learners' ability to gather, synthesize, and "translate" pertinent case information. This ability can be assessed in Objective Structured Clinical Examination and Virtual Patient settings using oral or written case summaries. Evidence of their validity in these settings includes adequate interrater agreement and moderate correlation with other assessments of clinical reasoning. We examined the use of written case summaries in a classroom setting as part of an examination designed to assess clinical reasoning. APPROACH: We developed and implemented written examinations for 2 preclerkship general practice courses in Years 4 and 5 of a 7-year curriculum. Examinations included 8 case summary questions in Year 4 and 5 in Year 5. Seven hundred students participated. Cases were scored using 3 criteria: extraction of pertinent findings, semantic quality, and global ratings. We examined the item parameters (using classical test theory) and generalizability of case summary items. We computed correlations between case summary scores and scores on other questions within the examination. RESULTS: Item parameters were acceptable (average item difficulty = 0.49-0.73 and 0.59-0.68 in Years 4 and 5; average point-biserials = 0.21-0.24 and 0.18-0.21). Scores were moderately generalizable (G coefficients = 0.40-0.50), with case-specificity a substantial source of measurement error (10.2%-19.5% of variance). Scoring and rater had small effects. Correlations with related constructs were low to moderate. CONCLUSIONS: There is good evidence regarding the scoring and generalizability of written case summaries for assessment of clinical problem representation. Further evidence regarding the extrapolation and implications of these assessments is warranted.

Assessing clinical reasoning in optometry using the script concordance test.

BACKGROUND: Clinical reasoning is central to any health profession but its development among learners is difficult to assess. Over the last few decades, the script concordance test (SCT) has been developed to solve this dilemma and has been used in many health professions; however, no study has been published on the use of the script concordance test in optometry. The purpose of this study was to develop and validate a script concordance test for the field of optometry. METHODS: A 101-question script concordance test (27 short clinical scenarios) was developed and administered online to a convenience sample of 23 second-year and 19 fourth-year students of optometry. It was also administered to a reference panel of 12 experienced optometrists to develop the scoring key. An item-total correlation was calculated for each question. Cronbach's alpha coefficient was used to evaluate the script concordance test reliability and a t-test compared the two groups. RESULTS: A final 77-question script concordance test was created by eliminating questions with low item-total correlation. Cronbach's alpha for this optimised 77-question script concordance test was 0.80. A group comparison revealed that the second-year students' scores (n = 23; mean score = 66.4 ± 7.87 per cent) were statistically lower (t = -4.141; p < 0.001) than those of the fourth-year students (n = 19; mean score = 75.5 ± 5.97 per cent). CONCLUSION: The online script concordance test developed for this study was found to be both reliable and capable of discriminating between second- and fourth-year optometric students. These results demonstrate that the script concordance test may be considered as a new tool in the optometric educators' assessment arsenal. Further studies will be needed to cover additional levels of professional development.

Do emergency physicians trust their patients?

The primary focus of research on the physician-patient relationship has been on patients' trust in their physicians. In this study, we explored physicians' trust in their patients. We held semi-structured interviews with expert emergency physicians concerning a patient they had just been managing. The physicians had been equipped with a head-mounted micro camera to film the encounter from an "own point of view perspective". The footage was used to stimulate recall during the interviews. Several participants made judgments on the reliability of their patients' accounts from the very beginning of the encounter. If accounts were not deemed reliable, participants implemented a variety of specific strategies in pursuing their history taking, i.e. checking for consistency by asking the same question at several points in the interview, cross-referencing information, questioning third-parties, examining the patient record, and systematically collecting data held to be objective. Our study raises the question of the influence of labeling patients as "reliable" or "unreliable" on their subsequent treatment in the emergency department. Further work is necessary to examine the accuracy of these judgments, the underlying cognitive processes (i.e. analytic versus intuitive) and their influence on decision-making.