Display options
Cite
Harris KI, Rowat JS, Suneja M. Embedding a longitudinal diagnostic reasoning curriculum in a residency program using a bolus/booster approach. Diagnosis (Berl). 2020;7(1):21-25doi: 10.1515/dx-2019-0023.
Harris, K. I., Rowat, J. S., & Suneja, M. (2020). Embedding a longitudinal diagnostic reasoning curriculum in a residency program using a bolus/booster approach. Diagnosis (Berlin, Germany), 7(1), 21-25. https://doi.org/10.1515/dx-2019-0023
Harris, Katherine I, et al. "Embedding a longitudinal diagnostic reasoning curriculum in a residency program using a bolus/booster approach." Diagnosis (Berlin, Germany) vol. 7,1 (2020): 21-25. doi: https://doi.org/10.1515/dx-2019-0023
Harris KI, Rowat JS, Suneja M. Embedding a longitudinal diagnostic reasoning curriculum in a residency program using a bolus/booster approach. Diagnosis (Berl). 2020 Jan 28;7(1):21-25. doi: 10.1515/dx-2019-0023. PMID: 31352429.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Diagnosis (Berl). 2020 Jan 28;7(1):21-25. doi: 10.1515/dx-2019-0023.

Embedding a longitudinal diagnostic reasoning curriculum in a residency program using a bolus/booster approach.

Diagnosis (Berlin, Germany)

Katherine I Harris, Jane S Rowat, Manish Suneja

Affiliations

  1. University of Iowa, Department of Internal Medicine, Iowa City, USA.

PMID: 31352429 DOI: 10.1515/dx-2019-0023

Abstract

Background Diagnostic reasoning skills are essential to the practice of medicine, yet longitudinal curricula to teach residents and evaluate performance in this area is lacking. We describe a longitudinal diagnostic reasoning curriculum implemented in a university-based internal medicine residency program and self-evaluation assessment of the curriculum's effectiveness. Methods A longitudinal diagnostic reasoning curriculum (bolus/booster) was developed and implemented in the fall of 2015 at the University of Iowa. R1, R2, and R3 cohorts were taught the "bolus" curriculum at the beginning of each academic year followed by a "booster" component to maintain and build upon diagnostic reasoning skills taught during the "bolus" phase. Self-administered diagnostic thinking inventory (DTI) scores were collected in the spring of pre-curriculum (baseline, 2014-2015) and post-curriculum (2016-2017). Results The overall DTI scores improved in the R1 cohort, although statistically significant differences were not seen with R2s and R3s. In the original DTI categories, R1s improved in both flexibility of thinking and structure of thinking, the R2s improved in structure of thinking and the R3s did not improve in either category. R1s showed improvement in three of the four subcategories - data acquisition, problem representation, and hypothesis generation. The R2s improved in the subcategory of problem representation. R3s showed no improvement in any of the subcategories. The R3 cohort had higher mean scores in all categories but this did not reach statistical significance. Conclusions Our program created and successfully implemented a longitudinal diagnostic reasoning curriculum. DTI scores improved after implementation of a new diagnostic reasoning curriculum, particularly in R1 cohort.

Keywords: diagnostic reasoning; education; internal medicine; internship and residency; problem-based learning

References

  1. Bowen JL. Educational strategies to promote clinical diagnostic reasoning. N Engl J Med 2006;355:2217–25. - PubMed
  2. Wilson RM, Harrison BT, Gibberd RW, Hamilton JD. An analysis of the causes of adverse events from the Quality in Australian Health Care Study. Med J Aust 1999;170:411–5. - PubMed
  3. Graber ML, Franklin N, Gordon R. Diagnostic error in internal medicine. Arch Int Med 2005;165:1493–9. - PubMed
  4. Makary MA, Daniel M. Medical error-the third leading cause of death in the US. Br Med J 2016;353:i2139. - PubMed
  5. Norman GR, Monteiro SD, Sherbino J, Ilgen JS, Schmidt HG, Mamede S. The causes of errors in clinical reasoning: cognitive biases, knowledge deficits, and dual process thinking. Acad Med 2017;92:23–30. - PubMed
  6. Durning SJ, Ratcliffe T, Artino AR Jr., van der Vleuten C, Beckman TJ, Holmboe E, et al. How is clinical reasoning developed, maintained, and objectively assessed? Views from expert internists and internal medicine interns. J Contin Educ Health Prof 2013;33:215–23. - PubMed
  7. Schmidt HG, Mamede S. How to improve the teaching of clinical reasoning: a narrative review and a proposal. Med Educ 2015;49:961–73. - PubMed
  8. Bordage G, Grant J, Marsden P. Quantitative assessment of diagnostic ability. Med Educ 1990;24:413–25. - PubMed
  9. Flanders SA, Centor B, Weber V, McGinn T, Desalvo K, Auerbach A. Challenges and opportunities in academic hospital medicine: report from the academic hospital medicine summit. J Hosp Med 2009;4:240–6. - PubMed
  10. Taylor DC, Hamdy H. Adult learning theories: implications for learning and teaching in medical education: AMEE Guide No. 83. Med Teach 2013;35:e1561–72. - PubMed
  11. Goldszmidt M, Minda JP, Bordage G. Developing a unified list of physicians’ reasoning tasks during clinical encounters. Acad Med 2013;88:390–7. - PubMed
  12. Tavakol M, Dennick R. Making sense of Cronbach’s alpha. Int J Med Educ 2011;2:53–5. - PubMed
  13. Norman G, Young M, Brooks L. Non-analytical models of clinical reasoning: the role of experience. Med Educ 2007;41:1140–5. - PubMed
  14. Norman G. Building on experience – the development of clinical reasoning. N Engl J Med 2006;355:2251–2. - PubMed
  15. Simpkin AL, Vyas JM, Armstrong KA. Diagnostic reasoning: an endangered competency in internal medicine training. Ann Intern Med 2017;167:507–8. - PubMed
  16. Norman G. Data dredging, salami-slicing, and other successful strategies to ensure rejection: twelve tips on how to not get your paper published. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract 2014;19:1–5. - PubMed

MeSH terms

Publication Types