Cargando…

Combination of different clinical reasoning tests in a national exam

INTRODUCTION: Clinical reasoning as a critical and high level of clinical competency should be acquired during medical education, and medical educators should attempt to assess this ability in medical students. Nowadays, there are several ways to evaluate medical students’ clinical reasoning ability...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: SADEGHI, ANAHITA, ALI ASGARI, ALI, MOULAEI, NEZARALI, MOHAMMADKARIMI, VAHID, DELAVARI, SOMAYEH, AMINI, MITRA, NASIRI, SETAREH, AKBARI, ROGHAYEH, SANJARI, MOJGAN, SEDIGHI, IRAJ, KHOSHNEVISASL, PARISA, KHOSHBATEN, MANOUCHEHR, SAFARI, SAEED, MOHAJERZADEH, LEILY, NABEIEI, PARISA, CHARLIN, BERNARD
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Shiraz University of Medical Sciences 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6820014/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31750362
http://dx.doi.org/10.30476/jamp.2019.83101.1083
_version_ 1783463857328488448
author SADEGHI, ANAHITA
ALI ASGARI, ALI
MOULAEI, NEZARALI
MOHAMMADKARIMI, VAHID
DELAVARI, SOMAYEH
AMINI, MITRA
NASIRI, SETAREH
AKBARI, ROGHAYEH
SANJARI, MOJGAN
SEDIGHI, IRAJ
KHOSHNEVISASL, PARISA
KHOSHBATEN, MANOUCHEHR
SAFARI, SAEED
MOHAJERZADEH, LEILY
NABEIEI, PARISA
CHARLIN, BERNARD
author_facet SADEGHI, ANAHITA
ALI ASGARI, ALI
MOULAEI, NEZARALI
MOHAMMADKARIMI, VAHID
DELAVARI, SOMAYEH
AMINI, MITRA
NASIRI, SETAREH
AKBARI, ROGHAYEH
SANJARI, MOJGAN
SEDIGHI, IRAJ
KHOSHNEVISASL, PARISA
KHOSHBATEN, MANOUCHEHR
SAFARI, SAEED
MOHAJERZADEH, LEILY
NABEIEI, PARISA
CHARLIN, BERNARD
author_sort SADEGHI, ANAHITA
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Clinical reasoning as a critical and high level of clinical competency should be acquired during medical education, and medical educators should attempt to assess this ability in medical students. Nowadays, there are several ways to evaluate medical students’ clinical reasoning ability in different countries worldwide. There are some well-known clinical reasoning tests such as Key Feature (KF), Clinical Reasoning Problem (CRP), Script Concordance Test (SCT), and Comprehensive Integrative Puzzle (CIP). Each of these tests has its advantages and disadvantages. In this study, we evaluated the reliability of combination of clinical reasoning tests SCT, KF, CIP, and CRP in one national exam and the correlation between the subtest scores of these tests together with the total score of the exam. METHODS: In this cross sectional study, a total number of 339 high ranked medical students from 60 medical schools in Iran participated in a national exam named “Medical Olympiad”. The ninth Medical Olympiad was held in Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran, under the direct supervision of the Ministry of Health and Medical Education in summer 2017. The expert group designed a combination of four types of clinical reasoning tests to assess both analytical and non-analytical clinical reasoning. Mean scores of SCT, CRP, KF, and CIP were measured using descriptive statistics. Reliability was calculated for each test and the combination of tests using Cronbach's alpha. Spearman's correlation coefficient was used to evaluate the correlation between the score of each subtest and the total score. SPSS version 21 was used for data analysis and the level of significance was considered <0.05. RESULTS: The reliability of the combination of tests was 0.815. The reliability of KF was 0.81 and 0.76, 0.80, and 0.92 for SCT, CRP, and CIP, respectively. The mean total score was 169.921±41.54 from 240. All correlations between each clinical reasoning test and total score were significant (P<0.001). The highest correlation (0.887) was seen between CIP score and total score. CONCLUSION: The study showed that combining different clinical reasoning tests can be a reliable way of measuring this ability.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6820014
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Shiraz University of Medical Sciences
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68200142019-11-20 Combination of different clinical reasoning tests in a national exam SADEGHI, ANAHITA ALI ASGARI, ALI MOULAEI, NEZARALI MOHAMMADKARIMI, VAHID DELAVARI, SOMAYEH AMINI, MITRA NASIRI, SETAREH AKBARI, ROGHAYEH SANJARI, MOJGAN SEDIGHI, IRAJ KHOSHNEVISASL, PARISA KHOSHBATEN, MANOUCHEHR SAFARI, SAEED MOHAJERZADEH, LEILY NABEIEI, PARISA CHARLIN, BERNARD J Adv Med Educ Prof Short Communication INTRODUCTION: Clinical reasoning as a critical and high level of clinical competency should be acquired during medical education, and medical educators should attempt to assess this ability in medical students. Nowadays, there are several ways to evaluate medical students’ clinical reasoning ability in different countries worldwide. There are some well-known clinical reasoning tests such as Key Feature (KF), Clinical Reasoning Problem (CRP), Script Concordance Test (SCT), and Comprehensive Integrative Puzzle (CIP). Each of these tests has its advantages and disadvantages. In this study, we evaluated the reliability of combination of clinical reasoning tests SCT, KF, CIP, and CRP in one national exam and the correlation between the subtest scores of these tests together with the total score of the exam. METHODS: In this cross sectional study, a total number of 339 high ranked medical students from 60 medical schools in Iran participated in a national exam named “Medical Olympiad”. The ninth Medical Olympiad was held in Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran, under the direct supervision of the Ministry of Health and Medical Education in summer 2017. The expert group designed a combination of four types of clinical reasoning tests to assess both analytical and non-analytical clinical reasoning. Mean scores of SCT, CRP, KF, and CIP were measured using descriptive statistics. Reliability was calculated for each test and the combination of tests using Cronbach's alpha. Spearman's correlation coefficient was used to evaluate the correlation between the score of each subtest and the total score. SPSS version 21 was used for data analysis and the level of significance was considered <0.05. RESULTS: The reliability of the combination of tests was 0.815. The reliability of KF was 0.81 and 0.76, 0.80, and 0.92 for SCT, CRP, and CIP, respectively. The mean total score was 169.921±41.54 from 240. All correlations between each clinical reasoning test and total score were significant (P<0.001). The highest correlation (0.887) was seen between CIP score and total score. CONCLUSION: The study showed that combining different clinical reasoning tests can be a reliable way of measuring this ability. Shiraz University of Medical Sciences 2019-10 /pmc/articles/PMC6820014/ /pubmed/31750362 http://dx.doi.org/10.30476/jamp.2019.83101.1083 Text en Copyright: © Shiraz University of Medical Sciences http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Short Communication
SADEGHI, ANAHITA
ALI ASGARI, ALI
MOULAEI, NEZARALI
MOHAMMADKARIMI, VAHID
DELAVARI, SOMAYEH
AMINI, MITRA
NASIRI, SETAREH
AKBARI, ROGHAYEH
SANJARI, MOJGAN
SEDIGHI, IRAJ
KHOSHNEVISASL, PARISA
KHOSHBATEN, MANOUCHEHR
SAFARI, SAEED
MOHAJERZADEH, LEILY
NABEIEI, PARISA
CHARLIN, BERNARD
Combination of different clinical reasoning tests in a national exam
title Combination of different clinical reasoning tests in a national exam
title_full Combination of different clinical reasoning tests in a national exam
title_fullStr Combination of different clinical reasoning tests in a national exam
title_full_unstemmed Combination of different clinical reasoning tests in a national exam
title_short Combination of different clinical reasoning tests in a national exam
title_sort combination of different clinical reasoning tests in a national exam
topic Short Communication
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6820014/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31750362
http://dx.doi.org/10.30476/jamp.2019.83101.1083
work_keys_str_mv AT sadeghianahita combinationofdifferentclinicalreasoningtestsinanationalexam
AT aliasgariali combinationofdifferentclinicalreasoningtestsinanationalexam
AT moulaeinezarali combinationofdifferentclinicalreasoningtestsinanationalexam
AT mohammadkarimivahid combinationofdifferentclinicalreasoningtestsinanationalexam
AT delavarisomayeh combinationofdifferentclinicalreasoningtestsinanationalexam
AT aminimitra combinationofdifferentclinicalreasoningtestsinanationalexam
AT nasirisetareh combinationofdifferentclinicalreasoningtestsinanationalexam
AT akbariroghayeh combinationofdifferentclinicalreasoningtestsinanationalexam
AT sanjarimojgan combinationofdifferentclinicalreasoningtestsinanationalexam
AT sedighiiraj combinationofdifferentclinicalreasoningtestsinanationalexam
AT khoshnevisaslparisa combinationofdifferentclinicalreasoningtestsinanationalexam
AT khoshbatenmanouchehr combinationofdifferentclinicalreasoningtestsinanationalexam
AT safarisaeed combinationofdifferentclinicalreasoningtestsinanationalexam
AT mohajerzadehleily combinationofdifferentclinicalreasoningtestsinanationalexam
AT nabeieiparisa combinationofdifferentclinicalreasoningtestsinanationalexam
AT charlinbernard combinationofdifferentclinicalreasoningtestsinanationalexam