References
- Cooper N, Bartlett M, Gay S, et al. Consensus statement on the content of clinical reasoning curricula in undergraduate medical education. Med Teach. 2021;43(2):152–9. DOI: 10.1080/0142159X.2020.1842343
- Kononowicz AA, Hege I, Edelbring S, et al. The need for longitudinal clinical reasoning teaching and assessment: Results of an international survey. Med Teach. 2020;42(4):457–62. DOI: 10.1080/0142159X.2019.1708293
- Hawks MK, Maciuba JM, Merkebu J, et al. Clinical reasoning curricula in preclinical undergraduate medical education: a scoping review. Acad Med. 2023;98(8):958–65. DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000005197
- Elvén M, Welin E, Wiegleb Edström D, et al. Clinical reasoning curricula in health professions education: a scoping review. J Med Educ Curric Dev. 2023;10:1–15. DOI: 10.1177/23821205231209093
- Singh M, Collins L, Farrington R, et al. From principles to practice: embedding clinical reasoning as a longitudinal curriculum theme in a medical school programme. Diagnosis. 2021;9(2):184–94. DOI: 10.1515/dx-2021-0031
- Parodis I, Andersson L, Durning SJ, et al. Clinical reasoning needs to be explicitly addressed in health professions curricula: recommendations from a European Consortium. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18(21):
11202 . DOI: 10.3390/ijerph182111202 - Hege I, Adler M, Donath D, et al. Developing a European longitudinal and interprofessional curriculum for clinical reasoning. Diagnosis. 2023;10(3):218–24. DOI: 10.1515/dx-2022-0103
- Rowat J, Suneja M. Longitudinal clinical reasoning theme embedded across four years of a medical school curriculum. Diagnosis. 2022;9(4):468–75. DOI: 10.1515/dx-2022-0046
- Mallory R, Maciuba JM, Roy M, Durning SJ. Teaching clinical reasoning in the preclinical period. Mil Med. 2024;189(9–10):2177–83. DOI: 10.1093/milmed/usad370
- Kim H, Sefcik JS, Bradway C. Characteristics of qualitative descriptive studies: a systematic review. Res Nurs Health. 2017;40(1):23–42. DOI: 10.1002/nur.21768
- Stalmeijer RE, McNaughton N, Van Mook WN. Using focus groups in medical education research: AMEE Guide No. 91. Med Teach. 2014;36(11):923–39. DOI: 10.3109/0142159X.2014.917165
- Daniel M, Rencic J, Durning SJ, et al. Clinical reasoning assessment methods: a scoping review and practical guidance. Acad Med. 2019;94(6):902–12. DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000002618
- Schmidt HG, Rikers RMJP. How expertise develops in medicine: knowledge encapsulation and illness script formation. Med Educ. 2007;41(12):1133–9. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2007.02915.x
- Croskerry P, Petrie DA, Reilly JB, Tait G. Deciding about fast and slow decisions. Acad Med. 2014;89(2):197–200. DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000121
- Chamberland M, Mamede S, Bergeron L, Varpio L. A layered analysis of self-explanation and structured reflection to support clinical reasoning in medical students. Perspect Med Educ. 2021;10:171–9. DOI: 10.1007/S40037-020-00603-2
- Chamberland M, Setrakian J, Bergeron L, Varpio L, St-Onge C, Thomas A. Harnessing a knowledge translation framework to implement an undergraduate medical education intervention: a longitudinal study. Perspect Med Educ. 2022;11(6):333–40. DOI: 10.1007/s40037-022-00735-7
- Braun V, Clarke V.
Thematic analysis . In: APA handbook of research methods in psychology, Vol 2: Research designs: quantitative, qualitative, neuropsychological, and biological. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 2012. pp. 57–71. DOI: 10.1037/13620-004 - Schmidt HG, Mamede S. How to improve the teaching of clinical reasoning: a narrative review and a proposal. Med Educ. 2015;49(10):961–73. DOI: 10.1111/medu.12775
- Brauer DG, Ferguson KJ. The integrated curriculum in medical education: AMEE Guide No. 96. Med Teach. 2015;37(4):312–22. DOI: 10.3109/0142159X.2014.970998
- Meeuwissen SN, Gijselaers WH, Wolfhagen IH, Oude Egbrink MG. Working beyond disciplines in teacher teams: teachers’ revelations on enablers and inhibitors. Perspect Med Educ. 2021;10:33–40. DOI: 10.1007/S40037-020-00644-7
- Cook DA, Hauer KE, Teherani A, et al. Curriculum research solutions: shifting from “did it work locally?” to contributing to a scholarly conversation. Acad Med. 2025;100(8):896–908. DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000006072