Developing a European longitudinal and interprofessional curriculum for clinical reasoning

  • Clinical reasoning is a complex and crucial ability health professions students need to acquire during their education. Despite its importance, explicit clinical reasoning teaching is not yet implemented in most health professions educational programs. Therefore, we carried out an international and interprofessional project to plan and develop a clinical reasoning curriculum with a train-the-trainer course to support educators in teaching this curriculum to students. We developed a framework and curricular blueprint. Then we created 25 student and 7 train-the-trainer learning units and we piloted 11 of these learning units at our institutions. Learners and faculty reported high satisfaction and they also provided helpful suggestions for improvements. One of the main challenges we faced was the heterogeneous understanding of clinical reasoning within and across professions. However, we learned from each other while discussing these different views and perspectives on clinical reasoningClinical reasoning is a complex and crucial ability health professions students need to acquire during their education. Despite its importance, explicit clinical reasoning teaching is not yet implemented in most health professions educational programs. Therefore, we carried out an international and interprofessional project to plan and develop a clinical reasoning curriculum with a train-the-trainer course to support educators in teaching this curriculum to students. We developed a framework and curricular blueprint. Then we created 25 student and 7 train-the-trainer learning units and we piloted 11 of these learning units at our institutions. Learners and faculty reported high satisfaction and they also provided helpful suggestions for improvements. One of the main challenges we faced was the heterogeneous understanding of clinical reasoning within and across professions. However, we learned from each other while discussing these different views and perspectives on clinical reasoning and were able to come to a shared understanding as the basis for developing the curriculum. Our curriculum fills an important gap in the availability of explicit clinical reasoning educational materials both for students and faculty and is unique with having specialists from different countries, schools, and professions. Faculty time and time for teaching clinical reasoning in existing curricula remain important barriers for implementation of clinical reasoning teaching.show moreshow less

Download full text files

Export metadata

Statistics

Number of document requests

Additional Services

Share in Twitter Search Google Scholar
Metadaten
Author:Inga HegeORCiDGND, Martin Adler, Daniel Donath, Steven J. Durning, Samuel Edelbring, Maria Elvén, Ada Bogusz, Carina Georg, Sören Huwendiek, Melina Körner, Andrzej A. Kononowicz, Ioannis Parodis, Ulrika Södergren, Felicitas L. Wagner, Desiree Wiegleb Edström
URN:urn:nbn:de:bvb:384-opus4-1021707
Frontdoor URLhttps://opus.bibliothek.uni-augsburg.de/opus4/102170
ISSN:2194-8011OPAC
ISSN:2194-802XOPAC
Parent Title (English):Diagnosis
Publisher:Walter de Gruyter
Place of publication:Berlin
Type:Article
Language:English
Year of first Publication:2023
Publishing Institution:Universität Augsburg
Release Date:2023/02/20
Tag:Biochemistry (medical); Clinical Biochemistry; Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health; Health Policy; Medicine (miscellaneous)
Volume:10
Issue:3
First Page:218
Last Page:224
Note:
Full author list includes the DID-ACT consortium. For details see the publisher's website.
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1515/dx-2022-0103
Institutes:Medizinische Fakultät
Medizinische Fakultät / Lehrstuhl für Medical Education Sciences
Dewey Decimal Classification:6 Technik, Medizin, angewandte Wissenschaften / 61 Medizin und Gesundheit / 610 Medizin und Gesundheit
Licence (German):CC-BY 4.0: Creative Commons: Namensnennung (mit Print on Demand)