Rubin (1975)
Elstein et al (1978)
Elstein & Bordage (1979)
Then, the articles that presented theories or models of clinical reasoning in medicine or provided evidence in relation to them were selected to full-text study. Studies were eligible for this critical review if they presented a model or a theory of clinical reasoning, or related critiqued models and theories or the studies that add some features to the theories and models of clinical reasoning (n=47). The inclusion criteria of selecting studies were: 1) published articles in English and Persian and 2) published articles in the field of medicine. Studies were excluded if they provided clinical reasoning models or theories in other fields (like nursing and optometry), examined the clinical reasoning in the field of artificial intelligence (like clinical decision support systems), and/or examined brain biology and brain functions (like fMRI studies).
After excluding irrelevant studies, a total of 31 documents were initially selected for review which is shown in PRISMA flowchart below ( Figure 1 ).
PRISMA flowchart.
Models and theories which were extracted from studies, classified to three categories and each category, based on Carnwel and Daly approach, reviewed in three steps: first, we present a summary of the models and theories, and then reflect other author’s views and finally, we present our view ( Table 2 ). 17 If a model or theory explains about the process of clinical reasoning our first category owns it while models and theories which clarified the formation of knowledge structures and their application during the clinical reasoning process belongs to the second category, and our third category consisted models and theories which consider more than one processing modes of clinical reasoning.
The list of 31 related literatures that included in the review
Category no. | Theory/model | Author | Year | Aspects related to supporting/criticizing the model |
---|---|---|---|---|
First category: theories and models based on the process of clinical reasoning | Hypothetico-deductive model | Elstein | 1990 | The description of the hypothetico-deductive model The advantages of hypothetico-deductive model |
Patel | 1986 | Lack of consistency of hypothetico-deductive model with other domains | ||
Higgs | 1992 | Clinical reasoning process is not sequential | ||
Charlin | 2000 | Unfamiliarity of psychological mechanisms involved in this model | ||
Holyoak | 2005 | No differentiation between novice and expert clinical reasoning | ||
Loftus | 2006 | Clarification of the role of hypothesis in clinical reasoning process | ||
Higgs | 2008 | Adequate description of the process of clinical reasoning | ||
Elstein | 1994 | Application of hypotheses for framing of clinical problems | ||
Second category: theories and models based on the knowledge structure | Illness script theory | Schmidt | 1984 | The description of the illness script theory Formation and development of the illness script |
Custers | 1998 | The description of the illness script theory | ||
Schmidt | 1990 | The structure of illness script Formation and development of the illness script | ||
Custers | 1996 | The structure of illness script | ||
Custers | 2015 | Script concordance test Formation and development of the illness script | ||
Custers | 1996 | The structure of illness script | ||
Harasym | 2008 | Formation and development of the illness script | ||
Mandin | 1997 | Distinction between the concept of the script and the schema | ||
Pattern recognition model | Barrows | 1987 | The description of the model | |
Case S | 1987 | It used by experienced practitioners | ||
Norman | 2007 | The most usual form of nonanalytic processes | ||
Elstein | 2009 | Unanswered questions about pattern recognition model | ||
Marcum | 2012 | The complexity of cognitive processes involved in clinical reasoning to be ignored. | ||
Higgs | 2008 | Pattern recognition model examined in limited field of expertise. | ||
Third category: compilation theories and mode | Dual processing theory | Evans | 2008 | The description of the theory |
Croskerry | 2009 | Advantages of this theory | ||
Croskerry | 2009 | Proposing a model based on dual processing theory | ||
Pelaccia | 2011 | Clarification of the place of pattern recognition and hypothetico-deductive models in dual processing theory. | ||
Evans | 2013 | Criticized this theory in five major themes | ||
Lucchiari | 2012 | Models based on dual processing theory | ||
Cognitive continuum | Hammond | 1996 | The description of the theory | |
Hamm | 1988 | The description of the theory | ||
Custers | 2013 | Advantages of this theory |
This category includes the models and theories that explain the clinical reasoning process, between models and theories that we reviewed, only hypothetico-deductive model was eligible to get placed in the first category as the most reputed model that explains the clinical reasoning process. This model was proposed by Elstein (1978), and, according to this model, the physicians primarily generate a limited number of diagnostic hypotheses or problem formulations in the process of solving a diagnostic problem and then testing them. These hypotheses guide further patient information. 18 , 19 Unlike the findings of hypothetico-deductive model that claim: “primarily generated and tested hypotheses by expert and novice are the same,” Patel believed that it is not consistent in other domains, like physics. 19
Higgs argued that this model posits the idea that the process of clinical reasoning is largely a sequential process. 20 Charlin pointed out that the psychological mechanisms involved in the generation and testing of relevant hypotheses are unfamiliar, 12 and Holyoak argued that this model does not distinguish between novice and expert clinical reasoning strategies. 21 Loftus believed that the collected information and the way they interpreted, distorted by the used hypothesis. 5 This model as an adequate description of the process of clinical reasoning has challenged by the case specificity findings. 7
Nevertheless, some researchers defend hypothetico-deductive model, Elstein argued that the small set of solutions that generated in this model transformed an unstructured problem to structured one and it is an effective way to solve diagnostic problems. 18 This model is recommended by medical experts as a useful reasoning strategy for medical students. 22 Hypothetico-deductive model is applicable when data are vague or reveal over time, 22 and is a representation of clinical reasoning. 20 This model represents a description of the mental processes used by physicians and has repeatedly been validated by empirical studies and is the basis for modern clinical education. 12
Hypothetico-deductive model assumes the physician starts hypothesizing after collecting patient information and then tests hypotheses, while we believe the physician starts hypothesizing initially from his/her clinical encounter. The initial hypotheses can be strong or weak, depending on whether the physician is an expert or novice, the difference between the novice and the expert lies in the quality of the hypotheses they made. Therefore, since the initial hypothesis of an expert has good quality, hypothesis testing will be fast and efficient. The simplicity of this model in describing the process of clinical reasoning is both strength and the weakness of it, as a strength, because it simply portrays the start point of the process of clinical reasoning so it can be used to design the teaching plan and evaluate clinical reasoning. As a weakness, because it considers the process of diagnostic reasoning very simple, while even for a novice, this process does not occur so easily, and other factors (such as the individual’s knowledge structure, the context, the health system, etc.) affect the process of clinical reasoning, but this model does not consider these factors.
For this category, we considered theories and models that explain the formation of knowledge structures in the clinical reasoning process, by this description and the inclusion criteria just one theory and one model of clinical reasoning gain eligibility to include, the “illness script theory” and the “pattern recognition model.”
The illness script theory proposed by Barrows and Feltovich consists of three components: 1) enabling conditions, 2) fault, and 3) consequences. 23 The first component is the factors such as age, sex, current medication, previous medical history, occupation, risk behavior, hereditary, and environment affect the probability of someone gets a disease, are the patient’s contextual and background factors that refer to “Enabling conditions.” These “Enabling conditions” can cause the latter pathophysiological malfunctioning that called “fault” which is the second component of illness script. Consequences of this fault are complaints, signs, and symptoms that consist of the third component. 24 Illness scripts are the list-like structures, 25 which conceptualized as a specific representation of clinical knowledge. 26 Script concordance test designed according to this theory. 27
While we were studying about Illness script theory, we realized that we could categorize studies into two broad groups. The first group is the studies that deal with the concept of the script, the schema, and the illness script, and their features, distinctions, and components ( Table 3 ). 24 , 26 – 28
The studies that deal with the concept of “script,” “schema,” and “illness script,” and their features, distinctions, and components
Author | year |
---|---|
Custers et al. | (1996) |
Custers et al. | (1996) |
Custers et al. | (1998) |
Custers et al. | (2015) |
Loftus | (2006) |
Charlin | (2000) |
The second group deals with the formation and development of the illness script during the acquisition of expertise and changes in the physician’s knowledge structure ( Table 4 ). 23 , 25 , 26 , 29
The studies that deal with the formation and development of “illness script” during the acquisition of expertise and changes in the physician’s knowledge structure
Author | year |
---|---|
Schmidt et al. | (1990) |
Schmidt et al. | (1984) |
Harasym et al. | (2008) |
The first group of studies also looked at the distinction between the concept of the script and the schema, but this distinction was not clear in the literature. The schemas and scripts are stored in long-term memory. 30
Schema as a knowledge structure has an “if/then” formatting and occurs sequentially, in the sense that this sequence divided into two branches: “if” and “then,” so we can claim out that its format is algorithmic. This algorithm starts with a hypothesis in a person’s mind or something that a person thinks about and then continues with inquiries and searches that a physician has performed and then with the findings that a physician has reached, and finish with the decisions that he/she has finally taken ( Figure 2 ).
Generic flow of events in a typical schema. D1: Decision No 1; D5: Decision No 6; F1: Finding No 1; F5: Finding No 5; H1: Hypothesis No 1; H2: Hypothesis No 2; I1: Inquiry No 1; I3: Inquiry No 3.
In terms of the structure of the script, we also agree with Schmidt’s view that the scripts are list-like structures, but unlike Charlin, who believed that “the script describes the structure of clinical knowledge,” we believe that the script is not necessarily the structure of clinical knowledge, but a knowledge structure that has clinical applications. The script is schemas for common situations, which include a packet or a list of expectations of what people see or do at a given location. The schemas and scripts are stored in long-term memory, and if physicians encounter a clinical case that matches with them, they will retrieve it from long-term memory and move it to short-term memory ( Figure 3 ).
Script as a routinized pathway of previously used schema. D1: Decision No 1; D5: Decision No 6; F1: Finding No 1; F5: Finding No 5; H1: Hypothesis No 1; H2: Hypothesis No 2; I1: Inquiry No 1; I3: Inquiry No 3.
In the pattern recognition model, a physician directly compares the pattern of the patient’s problem with disease patterns and if found them similar to each other, then select the pattern that matches it. 31 Experienced practitioners often use pattern recognition to achieve a medical diagnosis. 32 Norman and his colleagues argue that pattern recognition is the most usual form of nonanalytic processes. 11 However, Elstein proposed some questions about this model, as followed:
This model considers the complexity of cognitive processes involved in clinical reasoning to be insignificant. 34
Based on the definition of the pattern recognition model, it only mentions the existence of patterns in mind, but does not explain how the construction of these patterns occurred. The studies which designed to prove that the pattern recognition model happens in reality are in a limited field of expertise, like radiology, dermatology, and pathology. 7 So the pattern recognition model is not extendable to all medical specialties.
Some of the included documents were about “dual processing” and “cognitive continuum” theories that explain two modes of reasoning – “analytical” and “non-analytical,” these modes are the characteristics of both first and second category, so we cannot involve them in one of them, therefore they form our third category.
The dual-processing theories commonly have two different processing modes in which they refer to: System 1 and System 2. 13 System 1 described as a fast, automatic and intuitive mode, which shares similarities through perception, while System 2 is slow and analytic mode that applies rules without inferring emotions. 7
Croskerry believed that dual-processing theory is an applicable model in multiple domains of health care like decision-making and it can be useful in teaching decision theory or in making a platform to future research. 35 Pelaccia et al noted that in the framework of this theory, the pattern recognition and hypothetico-deductive models are the basis of the intuitive system and the analytic system, respectively. 1
Evans and Stanovich criticized this theory in five major themes: 1) various theorists have proposed multiple and vague definitions for this theory, 2) there is no consistency in associated attribute clusters with dual systems, 3) distinctions are referred to the continuum of processing and not to discrete processing; 4) the apparent dual-process phenomenon can present by single-process accounts; and 5) the evidence base for the dual-processing theory is ambiguous or unconvincing. 36
In the reviewing of the literature, we found out that some of the researchers established their models based on dual-processing theory like Marcum, 34 Croskerry, 35 , 37 and Lucchiari and Pravettoni. 10
Dual-processing theory employs many of the seemingly contradictory features that have been proposed for clinical reasoning in the literature (such as fast, slow, reflective, etc.). It seems that, in reality, a physician does not use just intuitive or analytic systems and the mind of physician operates in the space between them, while the dual-processing theory ignores this.
The theories and models that have been proposed following this theory have led to the introduction of cognitive concepts such as metacognition and perception and their role in the process of clinical reasoning. This theory has relatively clarified the role of emotions and their place of influence in the process of clinical reasoning, and has also contributed to clarifying the concept of intuition in clinical reasoning.
The second theory that has placed in third categories is cognitive continuum, as Hammond claimed, this theory considered two poles, an intuitive cognition and an analytical cognition, in which various modes or forms of cognition have relational order on a continuum, and this assumption rejected the dual-processing approach. 38 Hamm believed, this theory does not explain the information processing that is the basis of analysis and intuition, but based on analytical and intuitive cognitive attributes it gives us various techniques in describing cognitive modes. Also, he believed that this theory did not offer an instruction about thinking analytically or intuitively, and it just presented a general framework. Cognitive continuum theory described the features of cognition and their correlation with the characteristics of the task. 39 Custers noted that this theory illustrates the cognitive processes and the cognitive tasks on a continuum, and this theory can be used to provide advice on how to structure clinical tasks in an educational setting. 40 In criticizing cognitive continuum theory, we did totally agree with Hamm and Custers.
The present study was conducted to critically review theories and models of clinical reasoning that have often been raised in the medical education literature within five decades (1970–2018). Several theories and models presented in relation to clinical reasoning and it seems that they can explain only part of the complex process, but not the whole process. For example, the models and theories of the first category in our study just address the process of clinical reasoning and do not pay attention to knowledge structures and cognition; in the second category, they just focused on knowledge structures and their formations during clinical reasoning process and do not clarify the process of clinical reasoning. In addition, the dual processing and cognitive continuum theories that form the third category just covered the cognition part of the clinical reasoning. Therefore, to fulfill this gap, it may be helpful to build a Meta-model or Meta-theory, which unified all the models, and theories of clinical reasoning. Although our focus was on the main models and theories of clinical reasoning in the field of medical education, but we acknowledge that there are other models and theories of clinical reasoning in the literature and their absence can be the bias of this study.
This work was part of a PhD dissertation, funded and financially supported by the Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work.
An official website of the United States government
The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.
The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.
Email citation, add to collections.
Your saved search, create a file for external citation management software, your rss feed.
Affiliations.
Clinical reasoning is a multi-faceted and complex construct, the understanding of which has emerged from multiple fields outside of healthcare literature, primarily the psychological and behavioural sciences. The application of clinical reasoning is central to the advanced non-medical practitioner (ANMP) role, as complex patient caseloads with undifferentiated and undiagnosed diseases are now a regular feature in healthcare practice. This article explores some of the key concepts and terminology that have evolved over the last four decades and have led to our modern day understanding of this topic. It also considers how clinical reasoning is vital for improving evidence-based diagnosis and subsequent effective care planning. A comprehensive guide to applying diagnostic reasoning on a body systems basis will be explored later in this series.
Keywords: Advanced practice; Clinical reasoning; Consultation; Critical thinking; Diagnostic accuracy.
PubMed Disclaimer
Full text sources, other literature sources.
NCBI Literature Resources
MeSH PMC Bookshelf Disclaimer
The PubMed wordmark and PubMed logo are registered trademarks of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Unauthorized use of these marks is strictly prohibited.
Advice and resources to help you develop your critical voice.
Developing critical thinking skills is essential to your success at University and beyond. We all need to be critical thinkers to help us navigate our way through an information-rich world.
Whatever your discipline, you will engage with a wide variety of sources of information and evidence. You will develop the skills to make judgements about this evidence to form your own views and to present your views clearly.
One of the most common types of feedback received by students is that their work is ‘too descriptive’. This usually means that they have just stated what others have said and have not reflected critically on the material. They have not evaluated the evidence and constructed an argument.
Critical thinking is the art of making clear, reasoned judgements based on interpreting, understanding, applying and synthesising evidence gathered from observation, reading and experimentation. Burns, T., & Sinfield, S. (2016) Essential Study Skills: The Complete Guide to Success at University (4th ed.) London: SAGE, p94.
Being critical does not just mean finding fault. It means assessing evidence from a variety of sources and making reasoned conclusions. As a result of your analysis you may decide that a particular piece of evidence is not robust, or that you disagree with the conclusion, but you should be able to state why you have come to this view and incorporate this into a bigger picture of the literature.
Being critical goes beyond describing what you have heard in lectures or what you have read. It involves synthesising, analysing and evaluating what you have learned to develop your own argument or position.
Critical thinking is important in all subjects and disciplines – in science and engineering, as well as the arts and humanities. The types of evidence used to develop arguments may be very different but the processes and techniques are similar. Critical thinking is required for both undergraduate and postgraduate levels of study.
Purposeful reading can help with critical thinking because it encourages you to read actively rather than passively. When you read, ask yourself questions about what you are reading and make notes to record your views. Ask questions like:
Our web page covering Reading at university includes a handout to help you develop your own critical reading form and a suggested reading notes record sheet. These resources will help you record your thoughts after you read, which will help you to construct your argument.
Reading at university
Being a university student is about learning how to think, not what to think. Critical thinking shapes your own values and attitudes through a process of deliberating, debating and persuasion. Through developing your critical thinking you can move on from simply disagreeing to constructively assessing alternatives by building on doubts.
There are several key stages involved in developing your ideas and constructing an argument. You might like to use a form to help you think about the features of critical thinking and to break down the stages of developing your argument.
Features of critical thinking (pdf)
Features of critical thinking (Word rtf)
Our webpage on Academic writing includes a useful handout ‘Building an argument as you go’.
Academic writing
You should also consider the language you will use to introduce a range of viewpoints and to evaluate the various sources of evidence. This will help your reader to follow your argument. To get you started, the University of Manchester's Academic Phrasebank has a useful section on Being Critical.
Academic Phrasebank
Set yourself some tasks to help develop your critical thinking skills. Discuss material presented in lectures or from resource lists with your peers. Set up a critical reading group or use an online discussion forum. Think about a point you would like to make during discussions in tutorials and be prepared to back up your argument with evidence.
For more suggestions:
Developing your critical thinking - ideas (pdf)
Developing your critical thinking - ideas (Word rtf)
For further advice and more detailed resources please see the Critical Thinking section of our list of published Study skills guides.
Study skills guides
This article was published on 2024-02-26
Intended for healthcare professionals
Rapid response to:
The characteristic that distinguishes a professional nurse is cognitive rather than psychomotor ability. Nursing practice demands that practitioners display sound judgement and decision-making skills as critical thinking and clinical decision making is an essential component of nursing practice. Nurses’ ability to recognize and respond to signs of patient deterioration in a timely manner plays a pivotal role in patient outcomes (Purling & King 2012). Errors in clinical judgement and decision making are said to account for more than half of adverse clinical events (Tomlinson, 2015). The focus of the nurse clinical judgement has to be on quality evidence based care delivery, therefore, observational and reasoning skills will result in sound, reliable, clinical judgements. Clinical judgement, a concept which is critical to the nursing can be complex, because the nurse is required to use observation skills, identify relevant information, to identify the relationships among given elements through reasoning and judgement. Clinical reasoning is the process by which nurses observe patients status, process the information, come to an understanding of the patient problem, plan and implement interventions, evaluate outcomes, with reflection and learning from the process (Levett-Jones et al, 2010). At all times, nurses are responsible for their actions and are accountable for nursing judgment and action or inaction.
The speed and ability by which the nurses make sound clinical judgement is affected by their experience. Novice nurses may find this process difficult, whereas the experienced nurse should rely on her intuition, followed by fast action. Therefore education must begin at the undergraduate level to develop students’ critical thinking and clinical reasoning skills. Clinical reasoning is a learnt skill requiring determination and active engagement in deliberate practice design to improve performance. In order to acquire such skills, students need to develop critical thinking ability, as well as an understanding of how judgements and decisions are reached in complex healthcare environments.
As lifelong learners, nurses are constantly accumulating more knowledge, expertise, and experience, and it’s a rare nurse indeed who chooses to not apply his or her mind towards the goal of constant learning and professional growth. Institute of Medicine (IOM) report on the Future of Nursing, stated, that nurses must continue their education and engage in lifelong learning to gain the needed competencies for practice. American Nurses Association (ANA), Scope and Standards of Practice requires a nurse to remain involved in continuous learning and strengthening individual practice (p.26)
Alfaro-LeFevre, R. (2009). Critical thinking and clinical judgement: A practical approach to outcome-focused thinking. (4th ed.). St Louis: Elsevier
The future of nursing: Leading change, advancing health, (2010). https://campaignforaction.org/resource/future-nursing-iom-report
Levett-Jones, T., Hoffman, K. Dempsey, Y. Jeong, S., Noble, D., Norton, C., Roche, J., & Hickey, N. (2010). The ‘five rights’ of clinical reasoning: an educational model to enhance nursing students’ ability to identify and manage clinically ‘at risk’ patients. Nurse Education Today. 30(6), 515-520.
NMC (2010) New Standards for Pre-Registration Nursing. London: Nursing and Midwifery Council.
Purling A. & King L. (2012). A literature review: graduate nurses’ preparedness for recognising and responding to the deteriorating patient. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 21(23–24), 3451–3465
Thompson, C., Aitken, l., Doran, D., Dowing, D. (2013). An agenda for clinical decision making and judgement in nursing research and education. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 50 (12), 1720 - 1726 Tomlinson, J. (2015). Using clinical supervision to improve the quality and safety of patient care: a response to Berwick and Francis. BMC Medical Education, 15(103)
Competing interests: No competing interests
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
Critical thinking is the discipline of rigorously and skillfully using information, experience, observation, and reasoning to guide your decisions, actions, and beliefs. You'll need to actively question every step of your thinking process to do it well. Collecting, analyzing and evaluating information is an important skill in life, and a highly ...
Adopting this cycle facilitates the "thinking" behind the patient's management plan, allowing the healthcare professional to go through a series of systematic phases, ultimately leading to a final decision that considers what is best for the patient in a particular situation. ... This is a critical stage and the core of clinical reasoning ...
Key Takeaways. Researchers propose six levels of critical thinkers: Unreflective thinkers, Challenged thinkers, Beginning thinkers, Practicing thinkers, Advanced thinkers, and Master thinkers. The ...
Foundation for Critical Thinking. PO Box 31080 • Santa Barbara, CA 93130 . Toll Free 800.833.3645 • Fax 707.878.9111. [email protected]
According to the University of the People in California, having critical thinking skills is important because they are [1]: Universal. Crucial for the economy. Essential for improving language and presentation skills. Very helpful in promoting creativity. Important for self-reflection.
A diagram of the clinical reasoning framework is shown in Figure 1. In this diagram the cycle begins at 1200 hours and moves in a clockwise direction. The circle represents the ongoing and cyclical nature of clinical interventions and the importance of evaluation and reflection. There are eight main steps or phases in the clinical reasoning cycle.
Critical thinking is required for evaluating the best available scientific evidence for the treatment and care of a particular patient. Good clinical judgment is required to select the most relevant research evidence. The best clinical judgment, that is, reasoning across time about the particular patient through changes in the patient's ...
Critical thinking can be defined as, "the art of analysing and evaluating thinking with a view to improving it". The eight Parts or Elements of Thinking involved in critical thinking: All reasoning has a purpose (goals, objectives). All reasoning is an attempt to figure something out, to settle some question, to solvesome problem.
Critical Thinking. Critical thinking is a widely accepted educational goal. Its definition is contested, but the competing definitions can be understood as differing conceptions of the same basic concept: careful thinking directed to a goal. Conceptions differ with respect to the scope of such thinking, the type of goal, the criteria and norms ...
In recent decades, approaches to critical thinking have generally taken a practical turn, pivoting away from more abstract accounts - such as emphasizing the logical relations that hold between statements (Ennis, 1964) - and moving toward an emphasis on belief and action.According to the definition that Robert Ennis (2018) has been advocating for the last few decades, critical thinking is ...
4. Critical Thinking as an Applied Model for Intelligence. One definition of intelligence that directly addresses the question about intelligence and real-world problem solving comes from Nickerson (2020, p. 205): "the ability to learn, to reason well, to solve novel problems, and to deal effectively with novel problems—often unpredictable—that confront one in daily life."
As detailed in the table, multiple themes surrounding the cognitive and meta-cognitive processes that underpin clinical reasoning have been identified. Central to these processes is the practice of critical thinking. Much like the definition of clinical reasoning, there is also diversity with regard to definitions and conceptualisation of critical thinking in the healthcare setting.
Whether at a networking event with new people or a meeting with close colleagues, try to engage with people who challenge or help you develop your ideas. Having conversations that force you to support your position encourages you to refine your argument and think critically. 11. Stay humble.
study is shown in Fig. 1. In this diagram the cycle begins at 1200 h and moves in a clockwise direction. The circle represents the ongoing and cyclical nature of clinical encounters and the importance of evaluation and re ection. There are eight main steps or phases in the CR cycle. However, the distinctions be-tween the phases are not clear cut.
Critical thinking is the analysis of available facts, evidence, observations, and arguments in order to form a judgement by the application of rational, skeptical, and unbiased analyses and evaluation. [1] In modern times, the use of the phrase critical thinking can be traced to John Dewey, who used the phrase reflective thinking. [2] The application of critical thinking includes self-directed ...
xhibit intellectual traits or dispositions of mind. When these foundations of critical thinking - the elements of reasoning, intellectual standards, and intellectual traits - are made explicit and deeply understood, the clinician has explicit intellectual tools u. ful for examining, assessing and improving thought. This guide introduces the ...
Whilst creative or design-thinking is an essential differentiator in the 21st Century, all is for nothing if you don't complement creativity with critical thinking. The stage theory of critical thinking developed by psychologist Linda Elder and Richard Paul identifies six key stages of progression in critical thinking and provides a pathway ...
Abstract. Clinical reasoning is a complex cognitive process that is essential to evaluate and manage a patient's medical problem. The aim of this paper was to provide a critical review of the research literature on clinical reasoning theories and models. To conduct our study, we applied the process of conducting a literature review in four ...
Clinical reasoning is a multi-faceted and complex construct, the understanding of which has emerged from multiple fields outside of healthcare literature, primarily the psychological and behavioural sciences. The application of clinical reasoning is central to the advanced non-medical practitioner (ANMP) role, as complex patient caseloads with ...
Critical thinking shapes your own values and attitudes through a process of deliberating, debating and persuasion. Through developing your critical thinking you can move on from simply disagreeing to constructively assessing alternatives by building on doubts. There are several key stages involved in developing your ideas and constructing an ...
Critical Thinking Cycle (CTC) is a constructivist-based learning model designed to train and improve students' criti-cal thinking dispositions (CTD) and critical thinking skills (CTS). This model is composed of six phases, namely 1) thinking about issues/problems, 2) teaching critical thinking
Nurses are critical thinkers. The characteristic that distinguishes a professional nurse is cognitive rather than psychomotor ability. Nursing practice demands that practitioners display sound judgement and decision-making skills as critical thinking and clinical decision making is an essential component of nursing practice.