A19基于模拟的教育中常用的临床推理模型的识别

Emad Almomani, Jacqueline Sullivan, Natalie Pattison, Guillaume Alinier
{"title":"A19基于模拟的教育中常用的临床推理模型的识别","authors":"Emad Almomani, Jacqueline Sullivan, Natalie Pattison, Guillaume Alinier","doi":"10.54531/hbed6197","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Simulation can immerse learners in scenarios that mimic clinical situations, simultaneously mitigating safety risks and increasing standardization in healthcare education [1]. Through simulation, learners can get the chance to develop clinical reasoning with focused learning opportunities [2]. Clinical reasoning is multidimensional in nature, and underdeveloped clinical reasoning skills and the risk of cognitive overload can potentially threaten patient safety and delay care, so it is important to systematize, optimize and structure clinical reasoning for simulation-based education [3]. That can be achieved through using valid clinical reasoning models but with careful consideration to the contributing and influencing factors of case complexity, staff seniority, competence, scope of practice, specialty and subspecialty. A scoping review was undertaken to answer the questions: what are the best available valid and reliable clinical reasoning models for simulation-based education? We searched Medline, Scopus, Education Research Complete and Google Scholar to identify relevant recent primary research conducted on this topic from 2000 onwards. The search included MeSH topics of ‘Clinical reasoning’, ‘Simulation-based education’ and ‘Clinical Reasoning models’. The inclusion criteria were primary studies describing the clinical reasoning models developed for simulation-based courses. Two independent researchers agreed on the inclusion of the identified articles for full-text review. This review followed the review guidelines of Joanne Briggs Institute. Five valid and reliable models to structure the clinical reasoning process while attending simulation-based training were identified and are reported in Identified clinical reasoning models based on the scoping review There is an adequate number of clinical reasoning models to be used while taking part in simulation-based training; however, there is a significant basis to test the reliability and validity of these models against different competence and seniority levels, and applicability to other healthcare professions. The authors are presently working on the development of a new model using an innovative and rigorous approach. Authors confirm that all relevant ethical standards for research conduct and dissemination have been met. The submitting author confirms that relevant ethical approval was granted, if applicable.","PeriodicalId":93766,"journal":{"name":"International journal of healthcare simulation : advances in theory and practice","volume":"9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A19 Identification of clinical reasoning models commonly used in simulation-based education\",\"authors\":\"Emad Almomani, Jacqueline Sullivan, Natalie Pattison, Guillaume Alinier\",\"doi\":\"10.54531/hbed6197\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Simulation can immerse learners in scenarios that mimic clinical situations, simultaneously mitigating safety risks and increasing standardization in healthcare education [1]. Through simulation, learners can get the chance to develop clinical reasoning with focused learning opportunities [2]. Clinical reasoning is multidimensional in nature, and underdeveloped clinical reasoning skills and the risk of cognitive overload can potentially threaten patient safety and delay care, so it is important to systematize, optimize and structure clinical reasoning for simulation-based education [3]. That can be achieved through using valid clinical reasoning models but with careful consideration to the contributing and influencing factors of case complexity, staff seniority, competence, scope of practice, specialty and subspecialty. A scoping review was undertaken to answer the questions: what are the best available valid and reliable clinical reasoning models for simulation-based education? We searched Medline, Scopus, Education Research Complete and Google Scholar to identify relevant recent primary research conducted on this topic from 2000 onwards. The search included MeSH topics of ‘Clinical reasoning’, ‘Simulation-based education’ and ‘Clinical Reasoning models’. The inclusion criteria were primary studies describing the clinical reasoning models developed for simulation-based courses. Two independent researchers agreed on the inclusion of the identified articles for full-text review. This review followed the review guidelines of Joanne Briggs Institute. Five valid and reliable models to structure the clinical reasoning process while attending simulation-based training were identified and are reported in Identified clinical reasoning models based on the scoping review There is an adequate number of clinical reasoning models to be used while taking part in simulation-based training; however, there is a significant basis to test the reliability and validity of these models against different competence and seniority levels, and applicability to other healthcare professions. The authors are presently working on the development of a new model using an innovative and rigorous approach. Authors confirm that all relevant ethical standards for research conduct and dissemination have been met. The submitting author confirms that relevant ethical approval was granted, if applicable.\",\"PeriodicalId\":93766,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International journal of healthcare simulation : advances in theory and practice\",\"volume\":\"9 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International journal of healthcare simulation : advances in theory and practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.54531/hbed6197\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of healthcare simulation : advances in theory and practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54531/hbed6197","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

模拟可以让学习者沉浸在模拟临床情况的场景中,同时降低安全风险,提高医疗保健教育的标准化[1]。通过模拟,学习者可以获得发展临床推理的机会,并有集中的学习机会[2]。临床推理是多维度的,临床推理能力的不发达和认知超载的风险可能会威胁患者的安全并延误护理,因此对临床推理进行系统化、优化和结构化的模拟教育非常重要[3]。这可以通过使用有效的临床推理模型来实现,但要仔细考虑病例复杂性、工作人员资历、能力、业务范围、专科和亚专科等因素的促成和影响因素。进行了范围审查,以回答以下问题:什么是基于模拟的教育的最佳有效和可靠的临床推理模型?我们检索了Medline, Scopus, Education Research Complete和Google Scholar,以确定自2000年以来有关该主题的最新主要研究。搜索的MeSH主题包括“临床推理”、“基于模拟的教育”和“临床推理模型”。纳入标准是描述为模拟课程开发的临床推理模型的初步研究。两名独立研究人员同意将确定的文章纳入全文审查。本综述遵循乔安妮布里格斯研究所的综述指南。在基于范围审查的识别临床推理模型中,确定并报告了参加基于模拟的培训时结构临床推理过程的五个有效可靠的模型。参加基于模拟的培训时可以使用足够数量的临床推理模型;然而,有一个重要的基础来测试这些模型的信度和效度针对不同的能力和资历水平,并适用于其他医疗保健专业。作者目前正在开发一种使用创新和严格方法的新模型。作者确认已符合研究行为和传播的所有相关伦理标准。提交作者确认已获得相关的伦理批准(如适用)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
A19 Identification of clinical reasoning models commonly used in simulation-based education
Simulation can immerse learners in scenarios that mimic clinical situations, simultaneously mitigating safety risks and increasing standardization in healthcare education [1]. Through simulation, learners can get the chance to develop clinical reasoning with focused learning opportunities [2]. Clinical reasoning is multidimensional in nature, and underdeveloped clinical reasoning skills and the risk of cognitive overload can potentially threaten patient safety and delay care, so it is important to systematize, optimize and structure clinical reasoning for simulation-based education [3]. That can be achieved through using valid clinical reasoning models but with careful consideration to the contributing and influencing factors of case complexity, staff seniority, competence, scope of practice, specialty and subspecialty. A scoping review was undertaken to answer the questions: what are the best available valid and reliable clinical reasoning models for simulation-based education? We searched Medline, Scopus, Education Research Complete and Google Scholar to identify relevant recent primary research conducted on this topic from 2000 onwards. The search included MeSH topics of ‘Clinical reasoning’, ‘Simulation-based education’ and ‘Clinical Reasoning models’. The inclusion criteria were primary studies describing the clinical reasoning models developed for simulation-based courses. Two independent researchers agreed on the inclusion of the identified articles for full-text review. This review followed the review guidelines of Joanne Briggs Institute. Five valid and reliable models to structure the clinical reasoning process while attending simulation-based training were identified and are reported in Identified clinical reasoning models based on the scoping review There is an adequate number of clinical reasoning models to be used while taking part in simulation-based training; however, there is a significant basis to test the reliability and validity of these models against different competence and seniority levels, and applicability to other healthcare professions. The authors are presently working on the development of a new model using an innovative and rigorous approach. Authors confirm that all relevant ethical standards for research conduct and dissemination have been met. The submitting author confirms that relevant ethical approval was granted, if applicable.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
A pilot study comparing immersive virtual reality simulation and computerized virtual patient simulation in undergraduate medical education Use of prebriefing in simulation-based experience for nursing education: a scoping review Cross-discipline teaching and learning of cardiology through an augmented reality application The effectiveness and efficiency of using ChatGPT for writing health care simulations A75 Strengthening simulation quality assurance through the ‘Sim QA bundle’
×
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