How Do Students Enact Group Reasoning Within Online Interprofessional Education?

Paul Perversi, F. Kent, Zoe Henderson, K. Schliephake, F. Burstein, M. Leech
{"title":"How Do Students Enact Group Reasoning Within Online Interprofessional Education?","authors":"Paul Perversi, F. Kent, Zoe Henderson, K. Schliephake, F. Burstein, M. Leech","doi":"10.22230/jripe.2022v12n1a339","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: The capability of an interprofessional healthcare team to reach a shared understanding through group reasoning is critical to good healthcare delivery. Models for clinical reasoning have proved useful but remain focused on individual cognitive processes. Whilst interprofessional education has steadily gained real-world traction, it is unclear how interprofessional student groups practice group reasoning when performing online tasks.\nMethod: We analyzed the group reasoning processes with two teams of health professional students in an online interprofessional education task (n = 13). Two simulated interprofessional team meetings about a palliative case were audio recorded, transcribed, and deductively analyzed to determine the mechanisms of team deliberation using a previously published study of group reasoning.Results: The reasoning mechanisms outlined in a previous study (informationaccumulating, sense-making, and decision-making) were evident in an analysis of student group reasoning. In particular, students focused on sharing and agreeing on information, and to a lesser extent, recording information.\nConclusion: Attention to the mechanisms of action may be useful to facilitate teaching interprofessional reasoning. Group reasoning may benefit from focusing student attention on these stages: 1) prioritizing and sequencing of options, methods for exposing agreement about shared information, shared understanding of the situation, and options; 2) techniques for critically evaluating information so that opportunities arise to identify when information may disrupt existing understandings; and 3) development of documentation tools to assist recording of the process.","PeriodicalId":89817,"journal":{"name":"Journal of research in interprofessional practice and education","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of research in interprofessional practice and education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22230/jripe.2022v12n1a339","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The capability of an interprofessional healthcare team to reach a shared understanding through group reasoning is critical to good healthcare delivery. Models for clinical reasoning have proved useful but remain focused on individual cognitive processes. Whilst interprofessional education has steadily gained real-world traction, it is unclear how interprofessional student groups practice group reasoning when performing online tasks. Method: We analyzed the group reasoning processes with two teams of health professional students in an online interprofessional education task (n = 13). Two simulated interprofessional team meetings about a palliative case were audio recorded, transcribed, and deductively analyzed to determine the mechanisms of team deliberation using a previously published study of group reasoning.Results: The reasoning mechanisms outlined in a previous study (informationaccumulating, sense-making, and decision-making) were evident in an analysis of student group reasoning. In particular, students focused on sharing and agreeing on information, and to a lesser extent, recording information. Conclusion: Attention to the mechanisms of action may be useful to facilitate teaching interprofessional reasoning. Group reasoning may benefit from focusing student attention on these stages: 1) prioritizing and sequencing of options, methods for exposing agreement about shared information, shared understanding of the situation, and options; 2) techniques for critically evaluating information so that opportunities arise to identify when information may disrupt existing understandings; and 3) development of documentation tools to assist recording of the process.
在线跨专业教育中学生如何进行群体推理?
背景:跨专业医疗团队通过群体推理达成共识的能力对良好的医疗服务至关重要。临床推理模型已被证明是有用的,但仍然侧重于个人认知过程。虽然跨专业教育在现实世界中获得了稳定的吸引力,但尚不清楚跨专业学生群体在执行在线任务时如何练习群体推理。方法:分析两组卫生专业学生在在线跨专业教育任务中的群体推理过程(n = 13)。对两个模拟的关于姑息治疗案例的跨专业团队会议进行录音、转录和演绎分析,以确定团队审议的机制,并使用先前发表的群体推理研究。结果:在先前的研究中概述的推理机制(信息积累、意义形成和决策)在学生群体推理的分析中是明显的。特别是,学生们关注的是分享和同意信息,在较小程度上,记录信息。结论:重视作用机制有助于促进跨专业推理教学。将学生的注意力集中在以下几个阶段,群体推理可能会受益:1)选择的优先级和顺序,揭示关于共享信息的一致意见的方法,对情况和选项的共同理解;2)批判性评价信息的技术,以便有机会识别信息何时可能破坏现有的理解;3)开发文件工具,以协助记录过程。
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
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
小红书