Introduction: Given the complexity of teaching clinical reasoning to (future) healthcare professionals, the utilization of serious games has become popular for supporting clinical reasoning education. This scoping review outlines games designed to support teaching clinical reasoning in health professions education, with a specific emphasis on their alignment with the 8-step clinical reasoning cycle and the reflective practice framework, fundamental for effective learning. Methods: A scoping review using systematic searches across seven databases (PubMed, CINAHL, ERIC, PsycINFO, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase) was conducted. Game characteristics, technical requirements, and incorporation of clinical reasoning cycle steps were analyzed. Additional game information was obtained from the authors. Results: Nineteen unique games emerged, primarily simulation and escape room genres. Most games incorporated the following clinical reasoning steps: patient consideration (step 1), cue collection (step 2), intervention (step 6), and outcome evaluation (step 7). Processing information (step 3) and understanding the patient’s problem (step 4) were less prevalent, while goal setting (step 5) and reflection (step 8) were least integrated. Conclusion: All serious games reviewed show potential for improving clinical reasoning skills, but thoughtful alignment with learning objectives and contextual factors is vital. While this study aids health professions educators in understanding how games may support teaching of clinical reasoning, further research is needed to optimize their effective use in education. Notably, most games lack explicit incorporation of all clinical reasoning cycle steps, especially reflection, limiting its role in reflective practice. Hence, we recommend prioritizing a systematic clinical reasoning model with explicit reflective steps when using serious games for teaching clinical reasoning.
Fully aware of the unusual timing of submitting a commentary 30 years later, we want to reflect on the June edition of the British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology (BJCP) (1993), which featured four research articles on education in clinical pharmacology and therapeutics (CPT) written by our former professor, Theo de Vries, and an editorial highlighting the imperative to improve CPT education, specifically by paying more attention to rational drug prescribing for common diseases.1–5 This plea was illustrated by five cartoons (Figure 1) and formed the basis for the World Health Organization's (WHO) Guide to Good Prescribing and its 6-step. The first four cartoons portrayed the suboptimal state of CPT education as a metaphorical ‘Clinical Pharmacology Continent’ (CPC) and a ‘General Practitioners Island’ (GPI), with a large gap between them. While clinical pharmacologists investigated new drug therapies, general practitioners frequently found themselves unprepared when making rational treatment decisions.1 The final cartoon introduced a solution: problembased learning education, depicted as a bridge connecting the continent and the island. Over the past 30 years, considerable progress has been achieved in bridging the gap. Therefore, we intend to illustrate this transformation with a similar cartoon (Figure 2).
Paperbijdrage conferentie EARLI SIG 14, 11-14 september 2018, Genève Universities of Applied Sciences (UAS) that offer Professional Studies (PS) are required to educate students to become starting professionals with research competence, that enable them to deal with challenging tasks that professionals face in a dynamic knowledge society (e.g. Heggen, Karseth, & Kyvik, 2010). To assess professional and research competence, students at UAS in the Netherlands mostly develop a professional product for an external bidder as their graduation project. The professional product is an artefact that is ideally representative for students’ future professions within a specific domain, e.g. a strategic advice within the economic domain (e.g. Losse, 2016). Due to the integrative and complex character of this task, supervision is essential and we thus need to understand what expertise supervisors need and which are good pedagogic strategies. However, little is known about graduation project supervision at UAS. This literature review aims at providing knowledge about graduation project supervision and at revealing what further inquiry on graduation project supervision should aim at, by answering the following questions: 1. What expertise do supervisors need and what is known about pedagogic strategies in graduation project supervision at UAS? 2. What should further inquiry after graduation project supervision at UAS aim at?
