Exploring cognitive integration of basic science and its effect on diagnostic reasoning in novices

Perspectives on Medical Education
Kristina Lisk, Anne Agur, Nicole N. Woods1,2,3
1Rehabilitation Sciences Institute, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto
2Department of Family and Community Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto
3The Wilson Centre for Health Professions Education

Tóm tắt

Integration of basic and clinical science knowledge is increasingly being recognized as important for practice in the health professions. The concept of ‘cognitive integration’ places emphasis on the value of basic science in providing critical connections to clinical signs and symptoms while accounting for the fact that clinicians may not spontaneously articulate their use of basic science knowledge in clinical reasoning. In this study we used a diagnostic justification test to explore the impact of integrated basic science instruction on novices’ diagnostic reasoning process. Participants were allocated to an integrated basic science or clinical science training group. The integrated basic science group was taught the clinical features along with the underlying causal mechanisms of four musculoskeletal pathologies while the clinical science group was taught only the clinical features. Participants completed a diagnostic accuracy test immediately after initial learning, and one week later a diagnostic accuracy and justification test. The results showed that novices who learned the integrated causal mechanisms had superior diagnostic accuracy and better understanding of the relative importance of key clinical features. These findings further our understanding of cognitive integration by providing evidence of the specific changes in clinical reasoning when basic and clinical sciences are integrated during learning.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

Association of American Medical Colleges and the Howard Hughes Medical Institute. Report of Scientific Foundations for Future Physicians Committee. Washington, DC: Association of American Medical Colleges; 2009 [cited 2015 August 29]. 43 p. Available from: http://www.hhmi.org/news/aamc-hhmi-committee-defines-scientific-competencies-future-physicians

Anderson MB, Kanter SL. A Snapshot of Medical Student Education in the United States and Canada: Reports From 128 Schools. Acad Med. 2010;85:S2–18.

Kulasegaram KM, Martimianakis MA, Mylopoulos M, Whitehead CR, Woods NN. Cognition before curriculum: Rethinking the integration of basic science and clinical learning. Acad Med. 2013;88:1–8.

Brauer DG, Ferguson KJ. The integrated curriculum in medical education: AMEE guide no. 96. Med Teach. 2015;37:312–322.

Woods NN, Brooks LR, Norman GR. The value of basic science in clinical diagnosis: Creating coherence among signs and symptoms. Med Educ. 2005;39:107–112.

Woods NN, Neville AJ, Levinson AJ, Howey EH, Oczkowski WJ, Norman GR. The value of basic science in clinical diagnosis. Acad Med. 2006;81:S124–27.

Woods NN. Science is fundamental: the role of biomedical knowledge in clinical reasoning. Med Educ. 2007;41:1173–1177.

Baghdady MT, Pharoah MJ, Regehr G, Lam EW, Woods NN. The role of basic sciences in diagnostic oral radiology. J Dent Educ. 2009;73:1187–1193.

Baghdady MT, Carnahan H, Lam EW, Woods NN. Integration of basic sciences and clinical sciences in oral radiology education for dental students. J Dent Educ. 2013;77:757–763.

Goldszmidt M, Minda JP, Devantier S, Skye AL, Woods NN. Expanding the basic sciences debate: The role of physics knowledge in interpreting clinical findings. Adv Health Sci Educ. 2012;17:547–555.

Schmidt HG, Norman GR, Boshuizen HPA. A cognitive perspective on medical expertise: Theory and implications. Acad Med. 1990;65:611–621.

Norman GR, Trott AD, Brooks LR, Smith EKM. Cognitive differences in clinical reasoning related to postgraduate training. Teach Learn Med. 1994;6:114–120.

Williams RG, Klamen DL. Examining the diagnostic justification abilities of fourth-year medical students. Acad Med. 2012;87:1008–1014.

Cianciolo AT, Williams RG, Klamen DL, Roberts NK. Biomedical knowledge, clinical cognition and diagnostic justification: A structural equation model. Med Educ. 2013;47:309–316.

Alberstone CD, Benzel EC, Najm IM, Steinmetz MP. Anatomical Basis of Neurologic Diagnosis, 1st ed. New York: Thieme Medical Publishers Inc; 2009.

Moore KL, Dalley AF, Agur AMR. Clinically Oriented Anatomy, 7th ed. Baltimore: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2013.

Gilhooly KJ, McGeorge P, Hunter J, et al. Biomedical knowledge in diagnostic thinking: the case of electrocardiogram (ECG) interpretation. Eur J Cogn Psychol. 1997;9:199–223.

Woods NN, Howey EH, Brooks LR, Norman GR. Speed kills? Speed, accuracy, encapsulations and causal understanding. Med Educ. 2006;40:973–979.

Norman G, Young M, Brooks L. Non-analytical models of clinical reasoning: the role of experience. Med Educ. 2007;41:1140–1145.

Finnerty EP, Chauvin S, Bonaminio G, Andrews M, Carroll RG, Pangaro LN. Flexner revisited: The role and value of the basic sciences in medical education. Acad Med. 2010;85:349–355.

Irby DM, Cooke M, O’Brien BC. Calls for reform of medical education by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching: 1910 and 2010. Acad Med. 2010;85:220–227.

Ling Y, Swanson DB, Holtzman K, Bucak SD. Retention of basic science information by senior medical students. Acad Med. 2008;83:S82–S85.

Brooks WS, Panizzi Woodley KTC, Jackson JR, Hoesley CJ. Integration of gross anatomy in an organ system-based medical curriculum: Strategies and challenges. Anat Sci Educ. 2015;8:266–274.

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

Perspectives on Medical Education

Thông tin tác giả