Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Case Comparisons: An Efficient Way of Learning Radiology.
Kok, Ellen M; de Bruin, Anique B H; Leppink, Jimmie; van Merriënboer, Jeroen J G; Robben, Simon G F.
Afiliação
  • Kok EM; Department of Educational Development and Research, School of Health Professions Education, Maastricht University, PO Box 616, Maastricht, MD 6200, The Netherlands. Electronic address: e.kok@maastrichtuniversity.nl.
  • de Bruin AB; Department of Educational Development and Research, School of Health Professions Education, Maastricht University, PO Box 616, Maastricht, MD 6200, The Netherlands.
  • Leppink J; Department of Educational Development and Research, School of Health Professions Education, Maastricht University, PO Box 616, Maastricht, MD 6200, The Netherlands.
  • van Merriënboer JJ; Department of Educational Development and Research, School of Health Professions Education, Maastricht University, PO Box 616, Maastricht, MD 6200, The Netherlands.
  • Robben SG; Department of Radiology, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Acad Radiol ; 22(10): 1226-35, 2015 Oct.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26254543
ABSTRACT
RATIONALE AND

OBJECTIVES:

Radiologists commonly use comparison films to improve their differential diagnosis. Educational literature suggests that this technique might also be used to bolster the process of learning to interpret radiographs. We investigated the effectiveness of three comparison techniques in medical students, whom we invited to compare cases of the same disease (same-disease comparison), cases of different diseases (different-disease comparison), disease images with normal images (disease/normal comparison), and identical images (no comparison/control condition). Furthermore, we used eye-tracking technology to investigate which elements of the two cases were compared by the students. MATERIALS AND

METHODS:

We randomly assigned 84 medical students to one of four conditions and had them study different diseases on chest radiographs, while their eye movements were being measured. Thereafter, participants took two tests that measured diagnostic performance and their ability to locate diseases, respectively.

RESULTS:

Students studied most efficiently in the same-disease and different-disease comparison conditions test 1, F(3, 68) = 3.31, P = .025, ηp(2) = 0.128; test 2, F(3, 65) = 2.88, P = .043, ηp(2) = 0.117. We found that comparisons were effected in 91% of all trials (except for the control condition). Comparisons between normal anatomy were particularly common (45.8%) in all conditions.

CONCLUSIONS:

Comparing cases can be an efficient way of learning to interpret radiographs, especially when the comparison technique used is specifically tailored to the learning goal. Eye tracking provided insight into the comparison process, by showing that few comparisons were made between abnormalities, for example.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Radiologia Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials / Diagnostic_studies / Observational_studies Limite: Adult / Female / Humans / Male Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2015 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Radiologia Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials / Diagnostic_studies / Observational_studies Limite: Adult / Female / Humans / Male Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2015 Tipo de documento: Article