没有消息就是好消息 "就足够了吗?儿科住院医师培训项目中临床推理评估的主题分析。

IF 3 3区 医学 Q1 PEDIATRICS Academic Pediatrics Pub Date : 2024-11-05 DOI:10.1016/j.acap.2024.102600
James Bowen, Matthew Kelleher, Benjamin Kinnear, Daniel Schumacher, David A Turner, Lisa E Herrmann
{"title":"没有消息就是好消息 \"就足够了吗?儿科住院医师培训项目中临床推理评估的主题分析。","authors":"James Bowen, Matthew Kelleher, Benjamin Kinnear, Daniel Schumacher, David A Turner, Lisa E Herrmann","doi":"10.1016/j.acap.2024.102600","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Clinical reasoning (CR) includes numerous essential skills for clinicians, but how these skills are assessed in pediatric residency training is not well described. This study aimed to explore pediatric residency program leader perspectives on clinical reasoning assessment and identification of trainee deficiencies in this area.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Taking a social constructionist worldview, we conducted a thematic analysis of 20 semi-structured interviews with pediatric residency program leaders. Interviews explored how pediatric residency programs assess CR and how deficiencies are identified. Recruitment and analysis continued iteratively until thematic sufficiency was reached. Member checking enhanced trustworthiness of the results.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants noted a perceived lack of a shared mental model for CR assessment between program leaders and clinical supervisors. Four themes were generated to highlight CR assessment in pediatric residency programs: 1) Clinical supervisors escalate concerns about behaviors representing symptoms of CR deficits rather than diagnosing CR competency deficiencies and that CR assessment requires: 2) an outward display of autonomous decision-making, 3) psychologically safe environments for inquiry, and 4) longitudinal, individualized observation. Elements of pediatric residency programs that impede CR assessment were identified, including family-centered rounds and team-based clinical care.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study identified key components necessary for CR assessment and barriers that may lead to missed identification of deficiencies. While no single solution can create an ideal environment for CR assessment, this study identifies elements for enhancing assessment opportunities for early identification of deficiencies.</p>","PeriodicalId":50930,"journal":{"name":"Academic Pediatrics","volume":" ","pages":"102600"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Is \\\"No News is Good News\\\" Enough? A Thematic Analysis Exploring Clinical Reasoning Assessment in Pediatric Residency Programs.\",\"authors\":\"James Bowen, Matthew Kelleher, Benjamin Kinnear, Daniel Schumacher, David A Turner, Lisa E Herrmann\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.acap.2024.102600\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Clinical reasoning (CR) includes numerous essential skills for clinicians, but how these skills are assessed in pediatric residency training is not well described. This study aimed to explore pediatric residency program leader perspectives on clinical reasoning assessment and identification of trainee deficiencies in this area.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Taking a social constructionist worldview, we conducted a thematic analysis of 20 semi-structured interviews with pediatric residency program leaders. Interviews explored how pediatric residency programs assess CR and how deficiencies are identified. Recruitment and analysis continued iteratively until thematic sufficiency was reached. Member checking enhanced trustworthiness of the results.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants noted a perceived lack of a shared mental model for CR assessment between program leaders and clinical supervisors. Four themes were generated to highlight CR assessment in pediatric residency programs: 1) Clinical supervisors escalate concerns about behaviors representing symptoms of CR deficits rather than diagnosing CR competency deficiencies and that CR assessment requires: 2) an outward display of autonomous decision-making, 3) psychologically safe environments for inquiry, and 4) longitudinal, individualized observation. Elements of pediatric residency programs that impede CR assessment were identified, including family-centered rounds and team-based clinical care.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study identified key components necessary for CR assessment and barriers that may lead to missed identification of deficiencies. While no single solution can create an ideal environment for CR assessment, this study identifies elements for enhancing assessment opportunities for early identification of deficiencies.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50930,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Academic Pediatrics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"102600\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Academic Pediatrics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acap.2024.102600\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PEDIATRICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Academic Pediatrics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acap.2024.102600","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:临床推理(Clinical reasoning,CR)包括临床医生的许多基本技能,但在儿科住院医师培训中如何评估这些技能却没有很好的描述。本研究旨在探讨儿科住院医师培训项目负责人对临床推理评估的看法,并找出学员在这方面的不足:我们从社会建构主义的世界观出发,对儿科住院医师培训项目负责人的 20 个半结构式访谈进行了主题分析。访谈探讨了儿科住院医师培训项目如何评估临床实践能力以及如何发现不足之处。招募和分析工作不断反复进行,直到达到足够的主题。成员检查提高了结果的可信度:结果:参加者注意到,项目负责人和临床督导之间缺乏共同的临床实践评估心智模式。结果发现,在儿科住院医师培训项目中,缺乏共同的 CR 评估心智模式,因此产生了四个主题,以突出儿科住院医师培训项目中的 CR 评估:1)临床督导将对代表CR缺陷症状的行为的关注升级,而不是诊断CR能力缺陷;CR评估需要:2)自主决策的外在表现;3)心理安全的探究环境;4)纵向、个性化的观察。研究还发现了儿科住院医师培训项目中阻碍 CR 评估的因素,包括以家庭为中心的查房和以团队为基础的临床护理:本研究确定了 CR 评估所需的关键要素,以及可能导致无法识别缺陷的障碍。虽然没有单一的解决方案可以为 CR 评估创造理想的环境,但本研究确定了增加评估机会以尽早发现不足之处的要素。
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
Is "No News is Good News" Enough? A Thematic Analysis Exploring Clinical Reasoning Assessment in Pediatric Residency Programs.

Objective: Clinical reasoning (CR) includes numerous essential skills for clinicians, but how these skills are assessed in pediatric residency training is not well described. This study aimed to explore pediatric residency program leader perspectives on clinical reasoning assessment and identification of trainee deficiencies in this area.

Methods: Taking a social constructionist worldview, we conducted a thematic analysis of 20 semi-structured interviews with pediatric residency program leaders. Interviews explored how pediatric residency programs assess CR and how deficiencies are identified. Recruitment and analysis continued iteratively until thematic sufficiency was reached. Member checking enhanced trustworthiness of the results.

Results: Participants noted a perceived lack of a shared mental model for CR assessment between program leaders and clinical supervisors. Four themes were generated to highlight CR assessment in pediatric residency programs: 1) Clinical supervisors escalate concerns about behaviors representing symptoms of CR deficits rather than diagnosing CR competency deficiencies and that CR assessment requires: 2) an outward display of autonomous decision-making, 3) psychologically safe environments for inquiry, and 4) longitudinal, individualized observation. Elements of pediatric residency programs that impede CR assessment were identified, including family-centered rounds and team-based clinical care.

Conclusions: This study identified key components necessary for CR assessment and barriers that may lead to missed identification of deficiencies. While no single solution can create an ideal environment for CR assessment, this study identifies elements for enhancing assessment opportunities for early identification of deficiencies.

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
Academic Pediatrics
Academic Pediatrics PEDIATRICS-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
12.90%
发文量
300
审稿时长
60 days
期刊介绍: Academic Pediatrics, the official journal of the Academic Pediatric Association, is a peer-reviewed publication whose purpose is to strengthen the research and educational base of academic general pediatrics. The journal provides leadership in pediatric education, research, patient care and advocacy. Content areas include pediatric education, emergency medicine, injury, abuse, behavioral pediatrics, holistic medicine, child health services and health policy,and the environment. The journal provides an active forum for the presentation of pediatric educational research in diverse settings, involving medical students, residents, fellows, and practicing professionals. The journal also emphasizes important research relating to the quality of child health care, health care policy, and the organization of child health services. It also includes systematic reviews of primary care interventions and important methodologic papers to aid research in child health and education.
期刊最新文献
A Narrative Review of Key Studies in Medical Education in 2023: Applying the Current Literature to Educational Practice and Scholarship. My Father's Daughter and Doctor. Quality Initiative to Increase Early Initiation and Series Completion of HPV Vaccine and its Impact on Health Disparities. Adverse Childhood Experiences and Insufficient Sleep. An Untold Story: The Feelings of Pediatric Residents Early in the Covid-19 Pandemic and What They Can Teach Us Today.
×
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