What Do Clinicians Mean by “Good Clinical Judgment”: A Qualitative Study

Abstract

Good Clinical Judgment (GCJ) is associated with clinical excellence and accolades whereas poor clinical judgment is often associated with suboptimal care and the need for remediation. Although commonly referenced in practice, a shared definition for GCJ based on primary data is lacking. We interviewed 16 clinicians and surgeons across different specialties at one Canadian academic center to understand their conceptualization of GCJ. The data analysis led to the formulation of three pillars that were viewed by participants as core ingredients of GCJ. These included (1) a strong baseline knowledge and breadth of clinical experience, (2) the demonstration of curiosity, reflection, and wisdom, and (3) an ability to attend to contextual factors and understand the “bigger picture” when providing care to patients. Although there were inconsistent opinions regarding whether GCJ is innate or learned, participants reflected on strategies to support the development or improvement in clinical judgement for trainees.