Display options
Cite
Amini M, Moghadami M, Kojuri J, et al. An innovative method to assess clinical reasoning skills: Clinical reasoning tests in the second national medical science Olympiad in Iran. BMC Res Notes. 2011;4:418doi: 10.1186/1756-0500-4-418.
Amini, M., Moghadami, M., Kojuri, J., Abbasi, H., Abadi, A. A., Molaee, N. A., Pishbin, E., Javadzade, H. R., Kasmaee, V. M., Vakili, H., Sadat, M. A., Akbari, R., Omidvar, B., Shafaghi, A., Dehbozorgian, M., Jafari, M. M., Monajemi, A., Arabshahi, K. S., Adibi, P., & Charlin, B. (2011). An innovative method to assess clinical reasoning skills: Clinical reasoning tests in the second national medical science Olympiad in Iran. BMC research notes, 4418. https://doi.org/10.1186/1756-0500-4-418
Amini, Mitra, et al. "An innovative method to assess clinical reasoning skills: Clinical reasoning tests in the second national medical science Olympiad in Iran." BMC research notes vol. 4 (2011): 418. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/1756-0500-4-418
Amini M, Moghadami M, Kojuri J, Abbasi H, Abadi AA, Molaee NA, Pishbin E, Javadzade HR, Kasmaee VM, Vakili H, Sadat MA, Akbari R, Omidvar B, Shafaghi A, Dehbozorgian M, Jafari MM, Monajemi A, Arabshahi KS, Adibi P, Charlin B. An innovative method to assess clinical reasoning skills: Clinical reasoning tests in the second national medical science Olympiad in Iran. BMC Res Notes. 2011 Oct 17;4:418. doi: 10.1186/1756-0500-4-418. PMID: 22005350; PMCID: PMC3215186.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

BMC Res Notes. 2011 Oct 17;4:418. doi: 10.1186/1756-0500-4-418.

An innovative method to assess clinical reasoning skills: Clinical reasoning tests in the second national medical science Olympiad in Iran.

BMC research notes

Mitra Amini, Mohsen Moghadami, Javad Kojuri, Hamidreza Abbasi, Ali Arhami Doolat Abadi, Nezar Ali Molaee, Elham Pishbin, Hamid Reza Javadzade, Vahid Monsef Kasmaee, Hasan Vakili, Mohamad Ali Reis Sadat, Roghaye Akbari, Bita Omidvar, Afshin Shafaghi, Marzie Dehbozorgian, Mohammad Morad Jafari, Alireza Monajemi, Kamran Soltani Arabshahi, Peyman Adibi, Bernard Charlin

Affiliations

  1. Education Development and Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran. [email protected].

PMID: 22005350 PMCID: PMC3215186 DOI: 10.1186/1756-0500-4-418

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Clinical reasoning plays a major role in the ability of doctors to make a diagnosis and reach treatment decisions. This paper describes the use of four clinical reasoning tests in the second National Medical Science Olympiad in Iran: key features (KF), script concordance (SCT), clinical reasoning problems (CRP) and comprehensive integrative puzzles (CIP). The purpose of the study was to design a multi instrument for multiple roles approach in clinical reasoning field based on the theoretical framework, KF was used to measure data gathering, CRP was used to measure hypothesis formation, SCT and CIP were used to measure hypothesis evaluation and investigating the combined use of these tests in the Olympiad. A bank of clinical reasoning test items was developed for emergency medicine by a scientific expert committee representing all the medical schools in the country. These items were pretested by a reference group and the results were analyzed to select items that could be omitted. Then 135 top-ranked medical students from 45 medical universities in Iran participated in the clinical domain of the Olympiad. The reliability of each test was calculated by Cronbach's alpha. Item difficulty and the correlation between each item and the total score were measured. The correlation between the students' final grade and each of the clinical reasoning tests was calculated, as was the correlation between final grades and another measure of knowledge, i.e., the students' grade point average.

RESULTS: The combined reliability for all four clinical reasoning tests was 0.91. Of the four clinical reasoning tests we compared, reliability was highest for CIP (0.91). The reliability was 0.83 for KF, 0.78 for SCT and 0.71 for CRP. Most of the tests had an acceptable item difficulty level between 0.2 and 0.8. The correlation between the score for each item and the total test score for each of the four tests was positive. The correlations between scores for each test and total score were highest for KF and CIP. The correlation between scores for each test and grade point average was low to intermediate for all four of the tests.

CONCLUSION: The combination of these four clinical reasoning tests is a reliable evaluation tool that can be implemented to assess clinical reasoning skills in talented undergraduate medical students, however these data may not generalizable to whole medical students population. The CIP and KF tests showed the greatest potential to measure clinical reasoning skills. Grade point averages did not necessarily predict performance in the clinical domain of the national competitive examination for medical school students.

References

  1. Med Educ. 2002 Feb;36(2):160-5 - PubMed
  2. Acad Med. 1995 Feb;70(2):104-10 - PubMed
  3. Lancet. 1995 Apr 22;345(8956):1032-4 - PubMed
  4. Teach Learn Med. 2000 Fall;12(4):189-95 - PubMed
  5. Med Educ. 2005 Mar;39(3):284-91 - PubMed
  6. Med Educ. 2005 Apr;39(4):418-27 - PubMed
  7. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 1998;3(1):51-58 - PubMed
  8. Med Teach. 2002 Sep;24(5):507-15 - PubMed
  9. Acad Med. 2005 Apr;80(4):395-9 - PubMed
  10. Med Educ. 2005 Dec;39(12):1188-94 - PubMed
  11. Med Educ. 2001 May;35(5):430-6 - PubMed
  12. Med Teach. 2003 Mar;25(2):171-6 - PubMed
  13. Med Educ. 1981 Mar;15(2):126-35 - PubMed
  14. Med Teach. 2005 Aug;27(5):450-5 - PubMed
  15. Eval Health Prof. 2004 Sep;27(3):304-19 - PubMed
  16. Med Educ. 1983 Jul;17(4):256-76 - PubMed
  17. Med Educ. 2007 Dec;41(12):1178-84 - PubMed
  18. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2008 May 06;8:18 - PubMed

Publication Types