Key-feature questions for assessment of clinical reasoning: a literature review

Hrynchak, Patricia K.; Takahashi, Susan Glover; Nayer, Marla

doi:10.1111/medu.12509

Cited by 79 publications

(59 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…[19][20][21] It is assumed that more experience in clinical practice, must be accompanied by better scores on the KF exam in interns in comparison with externs. 18 However, this was not true in our study and there was no difference in KF exam scores between externs and interns. One reason may be that our students have less exposure in a clinical setting at bed side and thus do not learn clinical reasoning in practice during their externship.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 75%

“…10 The KF exam can be designed with varying numbers of questions and is able to distinguish between the experienced and the beginner student. 18 The KF exam is generally seen as an appropriate method of clinical reasoning evaluation and able to predict clinical practice authority in the future, although it is not possible to evaluate all clinical aspects by this method. 18 Higher scores on the KF exam can be a sign of being a more efficient physician in clinical practice in the future.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…18 The KF exam is generally seen as an appropriate method of clinical reasoning evaluation and able to predict clinical practice authority in the future, although it is not possible to evaluate all clinical aspects by this method. 18 Higher scores on the KF exam can be a sign of being a more efficient physician in clinical practice in the future. One thing that should not be forgotten is lack of popularity of this type of exam and also relying on classroom-based student learning in most educational institutes, including this teaching hospital.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Assessment Score Comparison of Knowledge and Clinical Reasoning of Medical Student Educated by Bedside or Conference Room Teaching in Internal Medicine Ward

Mortazavimoghaddam¹

2017

Res Dev Med Edu

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 75%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Assessment Score Comparison of Knowledge and Clinical Reasoning of Medical Student Educated by Bedside or Conference Room Teaching in Internal Medicine Ward

Mortazavimoghaddam¹

2017

Res Dev Med Edu

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…(Harden, 1988;Hrynchak, Glover Takahashi, & Nayer, 2014). This study provides evidence that performance in both the KFP and OSCE examinations is correlated with performance in the Regulation of Cognition domain of the MAI.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 64%

Metacognitive awareness and the link with undergraduate examination performance and clinical reasoning

Welch¹,

Young²,

Johnson³

et al. 2018

MedEdPublish

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Theory: Metacognitive awareness is a component of self-regulated learning and helps us to understand and control our thinking and learning. Thinking about thinking is also an important aspect of the clinical reasoning process for medical practitioners.Hypotheses: This pilot study researched the link between metacognitive awareness and undergraduate examination performance. The Metacognitive Awareness Inventory (MAI) is a validated 52 item survey instrument for measuring metacognitive awareness. It has eight sub-scales grouped into two domains: Knowledge of Cognition and Regulation of Cognition. It was hypothesised that MAI scores would increase between first and fifth-year undergraduate medicine students and secondly that MAI scores would correlate with undergraduate examinations results.Method: Medical students at James Cook University, Australia were invited to complete the MAI and consented to give access to their examination scores. Results:The results of this pilot study found that metacognitive awareness was not significantly different between first and fifth-year undergraduates in this sample. For first-year medical undergraduates there were correlations between the Knowledge of Cognition domain and their end of year examination results, but not with the Regulation of Cognition domain. For fifth-year students there were correlations between both the Knowledge and Regulation of Cognition domains and their end of year examination results. Conclusion:This study identified that metacognitive awareness is not significantly different between first and fifthyear medical students. This may cause concern given that the study identified the importance of both MAI domains in undergraduate medical examinations. This study should be repeated on a larger scale and may confirm that raising metacognitive awareness levels among students is desirable. Increasing metacognitive awareness may raise Welch P, Young L, Johnson P, Lindsay D MedEdPublish

show abstract

“…Scoring time per rater is estimated 1 min per case, and rater training may be needed. Technology may assist the rating in the future properties of question types derived from the key-feature approach (Hrynchak et al 2014).…”

Section: Current Methods Of Assessing Clinical Reasoningmentioning

confidence: 99%