Trends in the Acquisition of Clinical Reasoning in the Assessment of Speech Sound Disorders: Using the Script Concordance Test

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q2 AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY
Ting-Fang Chan, Li-Li Yeh
{"title":"Trends in the Acquisition of Clinical Reasoning in the Assessment of Speech Sound Disorders: Using the Script Concordance Test","authors":"Ting-Fang Chan,&nbsp;Li-Li Yeh","doi":"10.1111/1460-6984.70105","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Purpose</h3>\n \n <p>Clinical reasoning is essential for speech–language pathologists (SLPs) when addressing ill-defined questions in various clinical settings. This study focuses on the acquisition of clinical reasoning skills in SLP students, particularly their evolution with clinical experience. To achieve this, the study developed and validated the first cloud-based script concordance test (SCT) tailored for assessing clinical reasoning skills in SSD diagnosis.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>An expert panel of 15 SLPs (average experience of 20.3 years) helped develop and score the SCT, which was administered to 51 undergraduate students (22 sophomores, 18 juniors, and 11 seniors). Statistical analyses examined the predictive role and trend of clinical experience in three dimensions (utility, interpretation, and diagnosis).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>A significant difference in mean SCT scores was found between the expert panel and student groups (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.05). Trend analysis showed a significant impact of clinical experience on SCT performance across all dimensions (all <i>F</i>s &gt; 9.91, <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001), with greater experience linked to better reasoning skills. Low-scoring items highlighted challenges with stimulability testing, indicating a lack of clinical consensus.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>This study demonstrates that clinical reasoning skills in SSD assessment become more refined with accumulated experience. The SCT developed effectively differentiates reasoning abilities between experts and students, offering a valuable tool for advancing clinical decision-making in speech–language pathology. These findings have practical implications, empowering SLP educators to design effective training programs and preparing students for the challenges they may face in clinical practice.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS</h3>\n \n <div><i>What is already known on this subject?</i>\n \n <ul>\n \n <li>The knowledge base of clinical practitioners includes both content and its organization. Clinical reasoning is the cognitive ability to integrate, organize, and interpret information as a key aspect of expertise in evidence-based practice. Recently, script concordance tests, which use case-based scenarios to reflect clinical decision-making processes, have become a popular method for assessing these reasoning skills.</li>\n </ul>\n </div>\n \n <div><i>What this paper adds to existing knowledge?</i>\n \n <ul>\n \n <li>This study is the first to empirically show that clinical reasoning skills in speech–language pathology, particularly in assessing speech sound disorders, are progressively refined through clinical experience. It highlights that students’ reasoning skills during internships appear to be influenced by supervisory clinical approaches, potentially affecting diagnostic abilities. These reasoning skills may improve with further clinical experience or targeted continuing education. Additionally, the study developed the first SCT focused on SSD evaluation, demonstrating its effectiveness in distinguishing between expert and student clinical reasoning and decision-making abilities.</li>\n </ul>\n </div>\n \n <div><i>What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?</i>\n \n <ul>\n \n <li>A recent goal in clinical education is to make clinical reasoning processes more explicit and structured during training. Creating comprehensive case assessment scripts and designing concrete clinical thinking guidance programs integrated with effective measurement, such as the SCT developed in this study, could serve as teaching objectives for the clinical diagnosis of SSD.</li>\n </ul>\n </div>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":49182,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders","volume":"60 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1460-6984.70105","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

Clinical reasoning is essential for speech–language pathologists (SLPs) when addressing ill-defined questions in various clinical settings. This study focuses on the acquisition of clinical reasoning skills in SLP students, particularly their evolution with clinical experience. To achieve this, the study developed and validated the first cloud-based script concordance test (SCT) tailored for assessing clinical reasoning skills in SSD diagnosis.

Methods

An expert panel of 15 SLPs (average experience of 20.3 years) helped develop and score the SCT, which was administered to 51 undergraduate students (22 sophomores, 18 juniors, and 11 seniors). Statistical analyses examined the predictive role and trend of clinical experience in three dimensions (utility, interpretation, and diagnosis).

Results

A significant difference in mean SCT scores was found between the expert panel and student groups (p < 0.05). Trend analysis showed a significant impact of clinical experience on SCT performance across all dimensions (all Fs > 9.91, p < 0.001), with greater experience linked to better reasoning skills. Low-scoring items highlighted challenges with stimulability testing, indicating a lack of clinical consensus.

Conclusions

This study demonstrates that clinical reasoning skills in SSD assessment become more refined with accumulated experience. The SCT developed effectively differentiates reasoning abilities between experts and students, offering a valuable tool for advancing clinical decision-making in speech–language pathology. These findings have practical implications, empowering SLP educators to design effective training programs and preparing students for the challenges they may face in clinical practice.

WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS

What is already known on this subject?
  • The knowledge base of clinical practitioners includes both content and its organization. Clinical reasoning is the cognitive ability to integrate, organize, and interpret information as a key aspect of expertise in evidence-based practice. Recently, script concordance tests, which use case-based scenarios to reflect clinical decision-making processes, have become a popular method for assessing these reasoning skills.
What this paper adds to existing knowledge?
  • This study is the first to empirically show that clinical reasoning skills in speech–language pathology, particularly in assessing speech sound disorders, are progressively refined through clinical experience. It highlights that students’ reasoning skills during internships appear to be influenced by supervisory clinical approaches, potentially affecting diagnostic abilities. These reasoning skills may improve with further clinical experience or targeted continuing education. Additionally, the study developed the first SCT focused on SSD evaluation, demonstrating its effectiveness in distinguishing between expert and student clinical reasoning and decision-making abilities.
What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?
  • A recent goal in clinical education is to make clinical reasoning processes more explicit and structured during training. Creating comprehensive case assessment scripts and designing concrete clinical thinking guidance programs integrated with effective measurement, such as the SCT developed in this study, could serve as teaching objectives for the clinical diagnosis of SSD.
语音障碍评估中临床推理习得的趋势:使用文字一致性测试
目的临床推理是必不可少的语言病理学家(slp)在解决各种临床设置不明确的问题。本研究的重点是SLP学生临床推理技能的习得,特别是临床经验的演变。为了实现这一目标,该研究开发并验证了首个基于云的脚本一致性测试(SCT),该测试专门用于评估SSD诊断中的临床推理技能。方法由15名平均工作经验20.3年的学生组成的专家小组,对51名本科生(22名大二学生、18名大三学生和11名大四学生)进行SCT量表的编制和评分。统计分析检验了临床经验在三个维度(效用、解释和诊断)的预测作用和趋势。结果专家组和学生组的SCT平均分有显著差异(p <;0.05)。趋势分析显示,临床经验对SCT在所有维度上的表现都有显著影响(所有Fs >;9.91, p <;0.001),经验越丰富推理能力越强。得分低的项目突出了刺激性测试的挑战,表明缺乏临床共识。结论随着经验的积累,临床推理能力在SSD评估中的运用日趋完善。SCT有效地区分了专家和学生的推理能力,为语言病理学的临床决策提供了一个有价值的工具。这些发现具有实际意义,使SLP教育者能够设计有效的培训计划,并为学生在临床实践中可能面临的挑战做好准备。在这个问题上我们已经知道了什么?临床从业人员的知识库包括内容和组织。临床推理是一种整合、组织和解释信息的认知能力,是循证实践中专业知识的一个关键方面。最近,脚本一致性测试,使用基于案例的场景来反映临床决策过程,已经成为评估这些推理技能的流行方法。这篇论文为现有知识增加了什么?这项研究首次从经验上表明,语言病理学的临床推理技能,特别是评估语音障碍的临床推理技能,是通过临床经验逐步完善的。它强调学生在实习期间的推理能力似乎受到监督临床方法的影响,潜在地影响诊断能力。这些推理能力可能会随着进一步的临床经验或有针对性的继续教育而提高。此外,该研究开发了第一个专注于SSD评估的SCT,证明了其在区分专家和学生临床推理和决策能力方面的有效性。这项工作的潜在或实际临床意义是什么?临床教育最近的一个目标是使临床推理过程在训练中更加明确和结构化。创建全面的病例评估脚本,设计具体的临床思维指导方案,并结合有效的测量方法,如本研究开发的SCT,可作为SSD临床诊断的教学目标。
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
International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders
International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY-REHABILITATION
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
12.50%
发文量
116
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders (IJLCD) is the official journal of the Royal College of Speech & Language Therapists. The Journal welcomes submissions on all aspects of speech, language, communication disorders and speech and language therapy. It provides a forum for the exchange of information and discussion of issues of clinical or theoretical relevance in the above areas.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信