IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i2p936-d725219.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating the Clinical Reasoning of Student Health Professionals in Placement and Simulation Settings: A Systematic Review

Author

Listed:
  • Jennie Brentnall

    (Work Integrated Learning, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia)

  • Debbie Thackray

    (Physiotherapy, School of Health Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton SO17 1BJ, UK)

  • Belinda Judd

    (Work Integrated Learning, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia)

Abstract

(1) Background: Clinical reasoning is essential to the effective practice of autonomous health professionals and is, therefore, an essential capability to develop as students. This review aimed to systematically identify the tools available to health professional educators to evaluate students’ attainment of clinical reasoning capabilities in clinical placement and simulation settings. (2) Methods: A systemic review of seven databases was undertaken. Peer-reviewed, English-language publications reporting studies that developed or tested relevant tools were included. Searches included multiple terms related to clinical reasoning and health disciplines. Data regarding each tool’s conceptual basis and evaluated constructs were systematically extracted and analysed. (3) Results: Most of the 61 included papers evaluated students in medical and nursing disciplines, and over half reported on the Script Concordance Test or Lasater Clinical Judgement Rubric. A number of conceptual frameworks were referenced, though many papers did not reference any framework. (4) Conclusions: Overall, key outcomes highlighted an emphasis on diagnostic reasoning, as opposed to management reasoning. Tools were predominantly aligned with individual health disciplines and with limited cross-referencing within the field. Future research into clinical reasoning evaluation tools should build on and refer to existing approaches and consider contributions across professional disciplinary divides.

Suggested Citation

  • Jennie Brentnall & Debbie Thackray & Belinda Judd, 2022. "Evaluating the Clinical Reasoning of Student Health Professionals in Placement and Simulation Settings: A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(2), pages 1-15, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:2:p:936-:d:725219
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/2/936/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/2/936/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:2:p:936-:d:725219. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.