The Role of Information Visualisation and Anecdotal Evidence in Medical Students' Clinical Reasoning Process: A Cross-Sectional Survey Study.

IF 2 Q2 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES Journal of Medical Education and Curricular Development Pub Date : 2024-11-21 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1177/23821205241293491
Anna Janssen, Micah B Goldwater, Courtney B Hilton, Carissa Bonner, Tim Shaw
{"title":"The Role of Information Visualisation and Anecdotal Evidence in Medical Students' Clinical Reasoning Process: A Cross-Sectional Survey Study.","authors":"Anna Janssen, Micah B Goldwater, Courtney B Hilton, Carissa Bonner, Tim Shaw","doi":"10.1177/23821205241293491","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Medical students are often taught clinical reasoning implicitly, rather than through a formal curriculum. Like qualified health professionals, they engage in a wide range of information seeking and other practices as part of the clinical reasoning process. This increasingly includes seeking out information online and being informed by anecdotal information from social media or peer groups. The aim of this research was to investigate how anecdotes and icon arrays influenced the clinical reasoning process of medical students deciding to prescribe a hypothetical new drug.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cross-sectional survey design was used. The survey required participants to respond to six hypothetical clinical scenarios in which they were asked to prescribe a hypothetical drug \"polypill\" for a specific patient. The order of delivery of the six scenarios was randomised for each participant. In response to each scenario, participants indicated how effective they perceived each drug to be. The study received ethics approval from the University of Sydney Human Research Ethics Committee: Protocol No: 2019/001. All participants provided written informed consent before agreeing to participate in the study.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 56 medical students fully completed the survey. Statistical analysis of the responses indicated that the icon array may be effective for highlighting how the polypill reduces CVD risk, reducing the impact of anecdotes on efficacy judgments. Without the icon array, both the positive and negative anecdotes made participants less willing to prescribe the polypill.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Medical student clinical reasoning processes appear to be influenced by anecdotal information and data visualisations. The extent of this influence is unclear, but there may be a need to actively educate students about the influence of these factors on their decision-making as they graduate into a world where they will be increasingly interacting with anecdotal information on social media and visualisations of electronic data.</p>","PeriodicalId":45121,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Education and Curricular Development","volume":"11 ","pages":"23821205241293491"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11580097/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical Education and Curricular Development","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23821205241293491","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Medical students are often taught clinical reasoning implicitly, rather than through a formal curriculum. Like qualified health professionals, they engage in a wide range of information seeking and other practices as part of the clinical reasoning process. This increasingly includes seeking out information online and being informed by anecdotal information from social media or peer groups. The aim of this research was to investigate how anecdotes and icon arrays influenced the clinical reasoning process of medical students deciding to prescribe a hypothetical new drug.

Methods: A cross-sectional survey design was used. The survey required participants to respond to six hypothetical clinical scenarios in which they were asked to prescribe a hypothetical drug "polypill" for a specific patient. The order of delivery of the six scenarios was randomised for each participant. In response to each scenario, participants indicated how effective they perceived each drug to be. The study received ethics approval from the University of Sydney Human Research Ethics Committee: Protocol No: 2019/001. All participants provided written informed consent before agreeing to participate in the study.

Results: A total of 56 medical students fully completed the survey. Statistical analysis of the responses indicated that the icon array may be effective for highlighting how the polypill reduces CVD risk, reducing the impact of anecdotes on efficacy judgments. Without the icon array, both the positive and negative anecdotes made participants less willing to prescribe the polypill.

Conclusions: Medical student clinical reasoning processes appear to be influenced by anecdotal information and data visualisations. The extent of this influence is unclear, but there may be a need to actively educate students about the influence of these factors on their decision-making as they graduate into a world where they will be increasingly interacting with anecdotal information on social media and visualisations of electronic data.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
信息可视化和轶事证据在医学生临床推理过程中的作用:一项横断面调查研究。
背景:医科学生通常在潜移默化中学习临床推理,而不是通过正规课程。与合格的卫生专业人员一样,作为临床推理过程的一部分,他们会进行广泛的信息搜索和其他实践。这越来越多地包括在网上寻找信息,以及从社交媒体或同龄人群体中获取轶事信息。本研究旨在调查轶事和图标阵列如何影响医学生决定处方假定新药的临床推理过程:采用横断面调查设计。调查要求参与者回答六个假定的临床情景,其中要求他们为特定病人开具假定的药物 "多丸"。每个参与者在回答这六种情景时的顺序都是随机的。参与者在回答每个情景时,都会指出他们认为每种药物的效果如何。该研究获得了悉尼大学人类研究伦理委员会的伦理批准:协议编号:2019/001。所有参与者在同意参与研究之前都提供了书面知情同意书:共有 56 名医学生完整填写了调查问卷。对回答的统计分析表明,图标阵列可以有效地突出多丸如何降低心血管疾病风险,减少轶事对疗效判断的影响。如果没有图标阵列,正面和负面的轶事都会降低参与者开具多丸处方的意愿:结论:医学生的临床推理过程似乎受到轶事信息和数据可视化的影响。这种影响的程度尚不清楚,但可能需要积极教育学生认识到这些因素对其决策的影响,因为他们毕业后将越来越多地与社交媒体上的轶事信息和可视化电子数据互动。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Medical Education and Curricular Development
Journal of Medical Education and Curricular Development EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
62
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊最新文献
Does Medical Education Require Radical Change? The Role of Information Visualisation and Anecdotal Evidence in Medical Students' Clinical Reasoning Process: A Cross-Sectional Survey Study. Knowledge, Attitude, and Perceived Barriers of Undergraduate Medical Students Towards Research. A Cross-Sectional Questionnaire-Based Study in Morocco. Need for Structured Pain Management Curriculum and Competency-Based Evaluation in GME: An Observational Study in One Internal Medicine Residency Program. Improving Quality of Life in Underserved Communities: A Case from Humanity Initiative's Student-Led Clinics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1