医学生以治疗为中心的临床推理:与学业成功和职业承诺的关系

IF 3.2 2区 医学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Ender Tekes, Murat Tekin
{"title":"医学生以治疗为中心的临床推理:与学业成功和职业承诺的关系","authors":"Ender Tekes, Murat Tekin","doi":"10.1186/s12909-025-07989-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Clinical reasoning is a fundamental skill for medical students, enabling them to integrate knowledge and make informed treatment decisions. While previous studies have primarily focused on diagnostic reasoning, this study examines the relationship between treatment-focused clinical reasoning, academic performance, and professional commitment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cross-sectional study was conducted with final-year medical students (n = 53). Clinical reasoning skills were assessed using a structured case-based evaluation involving diabetes mellitus and hypertension management scenarios. Professional commitment was measured using the commitment to the profession of medicine scale, and academic performance was determined by cumulative grade point average. Correlation and multiple regression analyses were conducted to examine relationships among these variables.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean clinical reasoning score was 13.06 out of 54, indicating substantial challenges in treatment-based reasoning. Students performed better in the hypertension case (7.15/28) compared to the diabetes mellitus case (5.91/26). The most frequent difficulties included identifying hypoglycaemia-inducing drugs, recognizing contraindicated medications in renal impairment and heart failure, and selecting appropriate individualized therapies. While academic performance did not show a significant correlation with clinical reasoning scores (p > .05), a strong positive relationship was observed between professional commitment and clinical reasoning ability (r = .722, p < .05). Regression analysis indicated that both professional commitment and academic achievement significantly predicted clinical reasoning performance (R² = 0.560, p < .05), collectively explaining 56% of the variance.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These findings highlight the need for enhancing treatment-based reasoning education in medical curricula, as students exhibited difficulties in pharmacotherapy decision-making, especially in integrating contraindications and individualized treatment considerations. Professional commitment appears to be a stronger predictor of clinical reasoning than academic performance alone. Medical education strategies that reinforce patient-centred reasoning and professional engagement may improve preparedness for real-world therapeutic decision-making.</p>","PeriodicalId":51234,"journal":{"name":"BMC Medical Education","volume":"25 1","pages":"1370"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12505623/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Treatment-focused clinical reasoning in medical students: relationship with academic success and professional commitment.\",\"authors\":\"Ender Tekes, Murat Tekin\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12909-025-07989-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Clinical reasoning is a fundamental skill for medical students, enabling them to integrate knowledge and make informed treatment decisions. While previous studies have primarily focused on diagnostic reasoning, this study examines the relationship between treatment-focused clinical reasoning, academic performance, and professional commitment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cross-sectional study was conducted with final-year medical students (n = 53). Clinical reasoning skills were assessed using a structured case-based evaluation involving diabetes mellitus and hypertension management scenarios. Professional commitment was measured using the commitment to the profession of medicine scale, and academic performance was determined by cumulative grade point average. Correlation and multiple regression analyses were conducted to examine relationships among these variables.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean clinical reasoning score was 13.06 out of 54, indicating substantial challenges in treatment-based reasoning. Students performed better in the hypertension case (7.15/28) compared to the diabetes mellitus case (5.91/26). The most frequent difficulties included identifying hypoglycaemia-inducing drugs, recognizing contraindicated medications in renal impairment and heart failure, and selecting appropriate individualized therapies. While academic performance did not show a significant correlation with clinical reasoning scores (p > .05), a strong positive relationship was observed between professional commitment and clinical reasoning ability (r = .722, p < .05). Regression analysis indicated that both professional commitment and academic achievement significantly predicted clinical reasoning performance (R² = 0.560, p < .05), collectively explaining 56% of the variance.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These findings highlight the need for enhancing treatment-based reasoning education in medical curricula, as students exhibited difficulties in pharmacotherapy decision-making, especially in integrating contraindications and individualized treatment considerations. Professional commitment appears to be a stronger predictor of clinical reasoning than academic performance alone. Medical education strategies that reinforce patient-centred reasoning and professional engagement may improve preparedness for real-world therapeutic decision-making.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51234,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Medical Education\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"1370\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12505623/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Medical Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-025-07989-9\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Medical Education","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-025-07989-9","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:临床推理是医学生的一项基本技能,使他们能够整合知识并做出明智的治疗决策。虽然以前的研究主要集中在诊断推理上,但本研究探讨了以治疗为中心的临床推理、学业成绩和专业承诺之间的关系。方法:对53名医学生进行横断面研究。临床推理能力评估采用结构化的基于案例的评估,包括糖尿病和高血压的管理方案。专业承诺采用医学专业承诺量表来衡量,学业成绩采用累积平均绩点来衡量。通过相关分析和多元回归分析来检验这些变量之间的关系。结果:临床推理平均得分为13.06分(总分54分),表明基于治疗的推理面临着巨大挑战。高血压组(7.15/28)优于糖尿病组(5.91/26)。最常见的困难包括识别低血糖诱导药物,识别肾损害和心力衰竭的禁忌症药物,以及选择适当的个体化治疗。而学业成绩与临床推理得分无显著相关性(p < 0.05)。05),专业承诺与临床推理能力呈显著正相关(r =。结论:这些发现强调了在医学课程中加强基于治疗的推理教育的必要性,因为学生在药物治疗决策方面表现出困难,特别是在整合禁忌症和个体化治疗考虑方面。比起单纯的学业成绩,职业承诺似乎更能预测临床推理能力。加强以患者为中心的推理和专业参与的医学教育策略可以提高对现实世界治疗决策的准备。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Treatment-focused clinical reasoning in medical students: relationship with academic success and professional commitment.

Background: Clinical reasoning is a fundamental skill for medical students, enabling them to integrate knowledge and make informed treatment decisions. While previous studies have primarily focused on diagnostic reasoning, this study examines the relationship between treatment-focused clinical reasoning, academic performance, and professional commitment.

Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted with final-year medical students (n = 53). Clinical reasoning skills were assessed using a structured case-based evaluation involving diabetes mellitus and hypertension management scenarios. Professional commitment was measured using the commitment to the profession of medicine scale, and academic performance was determined by cumulative grade point average. Correlation and multiple regression analyses were conducted to examine relationships among these variables.

Results: The mean clinical reasoning score was 13.06 out of 54, indicating substantial challenges in treatment-based reasoning. Students performed better in the hypertension case (7.15/28) compared to the diabetes mellitus case (5.91/26). The most frequent difficulties included identifying hypoglycaemia-inducing drugs, recognizing contraindicated medications in renal impairment and heart failure, and selecting appropriate individualized therapies. While academic performance did not show a significant correlation with clinical reasoning scores (p > .05), a strong positive relationship was observed between professional commitment and clinical reasoning ability (r = .722, p < .05). Regression analysis indicated that both professional commitment and academic achievement significantly predicted clinical reasoning performance (R² = 0.560, p < .05), collectively explaining 56% of the variance.

Conclusion: These findings highlight the need for enhancing treatment-based reasoning education in medical curricula, as students exhibited difficulties in pharmacotherapy decision-making, especially in integrating contraindications and individualized treatment considerations. Professional commitment appears to be a stronger predictor of clinical reasoning than academic performance alone. Medical education strategies that reinforce patient-centred reasoning and professional engagement may improve preparedness for real-world therapeutic decision-making.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
BMC Medical Education
BMC Medical Education EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES-
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
11.10%
发文量
795
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: BMC Medical Education is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in relation to the training of healthcare professionals, including undergraduate, postgraduate, and continuing education. The journal has a special focus on curriculum development, evaluations of performance, assessment of training needs and evidence-based medicine.
×
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