Academic pediatrics · 2024
Is "No News is Good News" Enough? A Thematic Analysis Exploring Clinical Reasoning Assessment in Pediatric Residency Programs.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Bowen James, Kelleher Matthew, Kinnear Benjamin, Schumacher Daniel, Turner David A, Herrmann Lisa E
Аннотация
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 CR assessment and identification of trainee deficiencies in this area.
METHODS: Taking a social constructionist worldview, we conducted a thematic analysis of 20 semistructured 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 the 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.
METHODS: Taking a social constructionist worldview, we conducted a thematic analysis of 20 semistructured 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 the 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.