Ya-Ching Hung, Sara C Chaker, Matthew Sigel, Mariam Saad, Monal Yu-Hsuan Chang, Elizabeth D Slater
Addressing Current Deficits in Patient Education Materials Through Crowdsourcing
Annals of plastic surgery
construct clinical reasoning assessment growing area interest medical education literature script concordance testing sct evaluates clinical reasoning conditions uncertainty emerged innovative tool domain clinical reasoning assessment sct quantifies degree concordance learner experienced clinician attempts capture breadth responses expert clinicians acknowledging significant yet acceptable variation practice situations uncertainty sct shown valid reliable clinical reasoning assessment tool however sct provides quantitative information may provide complete assessment clinical reasoning think aloud ta qualitative research tool used clinical reasoning assessment learners verbalize thought process around assigned task study explores use ta form written reflection sct assess resident clinical reasoning hypothesizing information obtained written ta would enrich quantitative data obtained sct ninetyone pediatric postgraduate trainees 21 pediatricians 4 canadian training centers completed online test consisting 24 sct cases immediately followed retrospective written ta six 24 cases selected gather ta data cases chosen allow phases clinical decision making diagnosis investigation treatment represented ta data inductive thematic analysis employed systematically reviewing ta responses three main benefits adding written ta sct identified uncovering instances incorrect clinical reasoning despite correct sct response b revealing sound clinical reasoning context suboptimal sct response c detecting question misinterpretation written ta optimize sct demonstrating correct examinee responses based guessing uncertainty rather robust clinical rationale ta also enhance sct allowing examinees provide justification responses otherwise would considered incorrect identifying questions frequently misinterpreted avoid including future examinations ta also significant value differentiating acceptable variations expert clinician responses deviance associated faulty rationale question misinterpretation could improve sct reliability written ta protocol appears valuable tool assess trainees clinical reasoning strengthen quantitative assessment provided sct