Reflecting on diagnosis: The Metacognitive Diagnostic Reasoning Model ©.

IF 1.2 4区 医学
Sarah L Beebe, Angela M McNelis, Majeda El-Banna, Kristina Thomas Dreifuerst
{"title":"Reflecting on diagnosis: The Metacognitive Diagnostic Reasoning Model ©.","authors":"Sarah L Beebe, Angela M McNelis, Majeda El-Banna, Kristina Thomas Dreifuerst","doi":"10.1097/JXX.0000000000001018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Diagnostic reasoning is a complex cognitive process that requires intuitive, heuristic processing from knowledge and experience, as well as deliberate and reflective thinking. Evidence on interventions to improve diagnostic reasoning is inconsistent, in part because different terms and models are used to guide research.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To present a model of the factors of diagnostic reasoning in Advanced Practice Registered Nurses (APRNs), based on a review of the literature supporting the Metacognitive Diagnostic Reasoning (MDR) Model © .</p><p><strong>Methodology: </strong>A review of the literature through systematic database search, historical articles, texts, and documents was conducted from inception through August 2023 ( N = 41).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The MDR model depicts the following concepts: (1) metacognition is viewed as the driving force of diagnostic reasoning; (2) dual cognitive processing and knowledge representations are used; (3) once a diagnosis, treatment plan, and evaluation are complete, APRNs use metacognition for the next patient encounter, using repetition for improvement of the process.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The model combines key concepts of diagnostic reasoning, providing a framework for researchers to develop and test, and faculty to teach and evaluate this complex process in learners.</p><p><strong>Implications: </strong>The MDR model provides research opportunities to validate its usefulness and effectiveness and a framework to guide educational research, contributing to the body of evidence-based practice in nursing. In addition, it may foster ongoing education and training that could lead to more accurate diagnoses and treatment plans, ultimately improving patient care by reducing diagnostic errors.</p>","PeriodicalId":17179,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners","volume":"36 12","pages":"711-718"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/JXX.0000000000001018","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Diagnostic reasoning is a complex cognitive process that requires intuitive, heuristic processing from knowledge and experience, as well as deliberate and reflective thinking. Evidence on interventions to improve diagnostic reasoning is inconsistent, in part because different terms and models are used to guide research.

Purpose: To present a model of the factors of diagnostic reasoning in Advanced Practice Registered Nurses (APRNs), based on a review of the literature supporting the Metacognitive Diagnostic Reasoning (MDR) Model © .

Methodology: A review of the literature through systematic database search, historical articles, texts, and documents was conducted from inception through August 2023 ( N = 41).

Results: The MDR model depicts the following concepts: (1) metacognition is viewed as the driving force of diagnostic reasoning; (2) dual cognitive processing and knowledge representations are used; (3) once a diagnosis, treatment plan, and evaluation are complete, APRNs use metacognition for the next patient encounter, using repetition for improvement of the process.

Conclusions: The model combines key concepts of diagnostic reasoning, providing a framework for researchers to develop and test, and faculty to teach and evaluate this complex process in learners.

Implications: The MDR model provides research opportunities to validate its usefulness and effectiveness and a framework to guide educational research, contributing to the body of evidence-based practice in nursing. In addition, it may foster ongoing education and training that could lead to more accurate diagnoses and treatment plans, ultimately improving patient care by reducing diagnostic errors.

诊断反思:元认知诊断推理模型©。
背景:诊断推理是一个复杂的认知过程,需要从知识和经验中获得直观、启发式的加工,以及深思熟虑和反思的思维。关于改善诊断推理的干预措施的证据是不一致的,部分原因是使用不同的术语和模型来指导研究。目的:在回顾支持元认知诊断推理(MDR)模型的文献的基础上,建立高级执业注册护士(APRNs)诊断推理因素模型©。方法:通过系统的数据库检索、历史文章、文本和文件对文献进行回顾,从成立到2023年8月(N = 41)。结果:MDR模型描述了以下概念:(1)元认知被视为诊断推理的驱动力;(2)双重认知加工和知识表征;(3)一旦完成诊断、治疗方案和评估,APRNs就会对下一个患者使用元认知,通过重复来改进这一过程。结论:该模型结合了诊断推理的关键概念,为研究人员开发和测试以及教师在学习者中教授和评估这一复杂过程提供了一个框架。意义:MDR模型为验证其有用性和有效性提供了研究机会,并为指导教育研究提供了框架,为护理领域的循证实践做出了贡献。此外,它可能会促进持续的教育和培训,从而导致更准确的诊断和治疗计划,最终通过减少诊断错误来改善患者护理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
16.70%
发文量
172
期刊介绍: The Journal of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners (JAANP) is a monthly peer-reviewed professional journal that serves as the official publication of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners. Published since 1989, the JAANP provides a strong clinical focus with articles related to primary, secondary, and tertiary care, nurse practitioner education, health policy, ethics and ethical issues, and health care delivery. The journal publishes original research, integrative/comprehensive reviews, case studies, a variety of topics in clinical practice, and theory-based articles related to patient and professional education. Although the majority of nurse practitioners function in primary care, there is an increasing focus on the provision of care across all types of systems from acute to long-term care settings.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信