Reasoning like a doctor or like a nurse? An integrative review protocol
Introduction Clinical reasoning, a major competency for all health professionals, has been defined and studied ‘within’ each profession. We do not know if content, process and outcomes are comparable ‘between’ physician and nursing clinical reasoning. This paper aims to set up a protocol for an inte...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2021-09-01
|
| Series: | BMJ Open |
| Online Access: | https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/11/9/e049862.full |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1850181095275888640 |
|---|---|
| author | Rashmi A Kusurkar Jos Dobber Jettie Vreugdenhil Sunia Somra Hans Ket Eugène J F M Custers Marcel E Reinders |
| author_facet | Rashmi A Kusurkar Jos Dobber Jettie Vreugdenhil Sunia Somra Hans Ket Eugène J F M Custers Marcel E Reinders |
| author_sort | Rashmi A Kusurkar |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Introduction Clinical reasoning, a major competency for all health professionals, has been defined and studied ‘within’ each profession. We do not know if content, process and outcomes are comparable ‘between’ physician and nursing clinical reasoning. This paper aims to set up a protocol for an integrative review to analyse and synthesise the scientific nursing and medical clinical reasoning literature. It builds on the history of nursing and medical clinical reasoning research and aims to create a higher level of conceptual clarity of clinical reasoning, to increase mutual understanding in collaboration in patient care, education and research.Methods and analysis This integrative review follows stepwise the methods described by Whittmore and Knafl: problem identification, literature search, data evaluation, data analysis and presentation.The initial systematic and comprehensive search strategy is developed in collaboration with the clinical librarian and is performed in electronic databases, PubMed, CINAHL, PsycInfo and Web of Science from 30 March 2020 to 27 May 2020. Empirical and theoretical studies are included. This search will be accompanied by ancestry searching and purposeful sampling. A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses flow chart will summarise the selection process. The quality of eligible studies will be evaluated with a checklist, suitable for diverse study methods.The data analysis is inspired by concept analysis of Walker and Avant and layered analysis of an intervention of Cianciolo and Regehr. We will extract the data of the included studies conforming these layers and features, to capture the multifaceted nature of clinical reasoning in both professions. The data will be presented in a validity matrix to facilitate comparing and contrasting.Ethics and dissemination Ethics approval is not required. The outcomes will be disseminated through conference presentations and publications. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-d7cb74d78fc34cfdab6daf42b377f6b9 |
| institution | OA Journals |
| issn | 2044-6055 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2021-09-01 |
| publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
| record_format | Article |
| series | BMJ Open |
| spelling | doaj-art-d7cb74d78fc34cfdab6daf42b377f6b92025-08-20T02:17:59ZengBMJ Publishing GroupBMJ Open2044-60552021-09-0111910.1136/bmjopen-2021-049862Reasoning like a doctor or like a nurse? An integrative review protocolRashmi A Kusurkar0Jos Dobber1Jettie Vreugdenhil2Sunia Somra3Hans Ket4Eugène J F M Custers5Marcel E Reinders6Amsterdam UMC location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Research in Education, De Boelelaan 1118, Amsterdam, The NetherlandsAmsterdam School of Nursing, Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences, Amsterdam, The NetherlandsAmsterdam UMC, Research in Education, Faculty of Medicine, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The NetherlandsAmsterdam UMC, Research in Education, Faculty of Medicine, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The NetherlandsMedical Library, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The NetherlandsUniversity Medical Centre, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The NetherlandsAmsterdam UMC, Student Education Family Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The NetherlandsIntroduction Clinical reasoning, a major competency for all health professionals, has been defined and studied ‘within’ each profession. We do not know if content, process and outcomes are comparable ‘between’ physician and nursing clinical reasoning. This paper aims to set up a protocol for an integrative review to analyse and synthesise the scientific nursing and medical clinical reasoning literature. It builds on the history of nursing and medical clinical reasoning research and aims to create a higher level of conceptual clarity of clinical reasoning, to increase mutual understanding in collaboration in patient care, education and research.Methods and analysis This integrative review follows stepwise the methods described by Whittmore and Knafl: problem identification, literature search, data evaluation, data analysis and presentation.The initial systematic and comprehensive search strategy is developed in collaboration with the clinical librarian and is performed in electronic databases, PubMed, CINAHL, PsycInfo and Web of Science from 30 March 2020 to 27 May 2020. Empirical and theoretical studies are included. This search will be accompanied by ancestry searching and purposeful sampling. A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses flow chart will summarise the selection process. The quality of eligible studies will be evaluated with a checklist, suitable for diverse study methods.The data analysis is inspired by concept analysis of Walker and Avant and layered analysis of an intervention of Cianciolo and Regehr. We will extract the data of the included studies conforming these layers and features, to capture the multifaceted nature of clinical reasoning in both professions. The data will be presented in a validity matrix to facilitate comparing and contrasting.Ethics and dissemination Ethics approval is not required. The outcomes will be disseminated through conference presentations and publications.https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/11/9/e049862.full |
| spellingShingle | Rashmi A Kusurkar Jos Dobber Jettie Vreugdenhil Sunia Somra Hans Ket Eugène J F M Custers Marcel E Reinders Reasoning like a doctor or like a nurse? An integrative review protocol BMJ Open |
| title | Reasoning like a doctor or like a nurse? An integrative review protocol |
| title_full | Reasoning like a doctor or like a nurse? An integrative review protocol |
| title_fullStr | Reasoning like a doctor or like a nurse? An integrative review protocol |
| title_full_unstemmed | Reasoning like a doctor or like a nurse? An integrative review protocol |
| title_short | Reasoning like a doctor or like a nurse? An integrative review protocol |
| title_sort | reasoning like a doctor or like a nurse an integrative review protocol |
| url | https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/11/9/e049862.full |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT rashmiakusurkar reasoninglikeadoctororlikeanurseanintegrativereviewprotocol AT josdobber reasoninglikeadoctororlikeanurseanintegrativereviewprotocol AT jettievreugdenhil reasoninglikeadoctororlikeanurseanintegrativereviewprotocol AT suniasomra reasoninglikeadoctororlikeanurseanintegrativereviewprotocol AT hansket reasoninglikeadoctororlikeanurseanintegrativereviewprotocol AT eugenejfmcusters reasoninglikeadoctororlikeanurseanintegrativereviewprotocol AT marcelereinders reasoninglikeadoctororlikeanurseanintegrativereviewprotocol |