Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Evaluación de una prueba para valorar el razonamiento clínico en diferentes niveles de capacitación médica / Assessing a test to evaluate clinical analytical thinking according to medical training level
Baño, Gabriel; Di Lalla, Sandra; Domínguez, Paula; Noel Seoane, María; Wainsztein, Raquel; Ossorio, María Fabiana; Ferrero, Fernando.
Affiliation
  • Baño, Gabriel; Hospital General de Niños Pedro de Elizalde Montes de Oca 40. Buenos Aires. AR
  • Di Lalla, Sandra; Hospital General de Niños Pedro de Elizalde Montes de Oca 40. Buenos Aires. AR
  • Domínguez, Paula; Hospital General de Niños Pedro de Elizalde Montes de Oca 40. Buenos Aires. AR
  • Noel Seoane, María; Hospital General de Niños Pedro de Elizalde Montes de Oca 40. Buenos Aires. AR
  • Wainsztein, Raquel; Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Medicina. Departamento de Pediatría. AR
  • Ossorio, María Fabiana; Hospital General de Niños Pedro de Elizalde Montes de Oca 40. Buenos Aires. AR
  • Ferrero, Fernando; Hospital General de Niños Pedro de Elizalde Montes de Oca 40. Buenos Aires. AR
Rev. méd. Chile ; 139(4): 455-461, abr. 2011. ilus
Article in Es | LILACS | ID: lil-597640
Responsible library: BR1.1
ABSTRACT

Background:

MATCH (Measuring Analytical Thinking in Clinical Health Care) is an instrument to evaluate clinical reasoning.

Aim:

To assess MATCH performance in professionals and students with different training in pediatrics. Material and

Methods:

MATCH was administered to medical students (S), frst (R1) and third (R3) year residents and staff physicians (P). We evaluated the score and time required to achieve it, according to training level in pediatrics.

Results:

Eighty fve subjects were included (23 S, 28 R1, 17 R3 y 17 P), achieving 37.4 ± 6.0 points, in 25.2 ± 8.5 minutes. There were significant differences in score and time, according to training level. There was a positive correlation between training level and score (Rho = 0.515; p < 0.001), and a negative one between training level and time (Rho = -0.589; p < 0.001).

Conclusions:

More experienced and trained professionals had a better performance in a clinical analytical thinking test.
Subject(s)
Key words

Full text: 1 Index: LILACS Main subject: Pediatrics / Students, Medical / Thinking / Clinical Competence / Internship and Residency Type of study: Diagnostic_studies / Observational_studies / Prevalence_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limits: Humans Country/Region as subject: America do sul / Argentina Language: Es Journal: Rev. méd. Chile Journal subject: MEDICINA Year: 2011 Type: Article

Full text: 1 Index: LILACS Main subject: Pediatrics / Students, Medical / Thinking / Clinical Competence / Internship and Residency Type of study: Diagnostic_studies / Observational_studies / Prevalence_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limits: Humans Country/Region as subject: America do sul / Argentina Language: Es Journal: Rev. méd. Chile Journal subject: MEDICINA Year: 2011 Type: Article