Showing Your Thinking: Using Mind Maps to Understand the Gaps Between Experienced Emergency Physicians and Their Students

Background Clinical teaching faculty rely on schemas for diagnosis. When they attempt to teach medical students, there may be a gap in the interpretation because the students do not have the same schemas. The aim of this analysis was to explore expert thinking processes through mind maps, to help de...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:AEM education and training Vol. 4; no. 1; pp. 54 - 63
Main Authors: Gossack‐Keenan, Kira, De Wit, Kerstin, Gardiner, Emily, Turcotte, Michelle, Chan, Teresa M., Santen, Sally
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: United States John Wiley and Sons Inc 01-01-2020
Subjects:
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Background Clinical teaching faculty rely on schemas for diagnosis. When they attempt to teach medical students, there may be a gap in the interpretation because the students do not have the same schemas. The aim of this analysis was to explore expert thinking processes through mind maps, to help determine the gaps between an expert's mind map of their diagnostic thinking and how students interpret this teaching artifact. Methods A novel mind‐mapping approach was used to examine how emergency physicians (EPs) explain their clinical reasoning schemas. Nine EPs were shown two different videos of a student interviewing a patient with possible venous thromboembolism. EPs were then asked to explain their diagnostic approach using a mind map, as if they were thinking to a student. Later, another medical student interviewed the EPs to clarify the mind map and revise as needed. A coding framework was generated to determine the discrepancy between the EP‐generated mind map and the novice's interpretation. Results Every mind map (18 mind maps from nine individuals) contained some discrepancy between the expert's mind and novice's interpretation. From the qualitative analysis of the changes between the originally created mind map and the later revision, the authors developed a conceptual framework describing types of amendments that students might expect teachers to make in their mind maps: 1) substantive amendments, such as incomplete mapping; and 2) clarifications, such as the need to explain background for a mind map element. Conclusion Emergency physician teachers tend to make jumps in reasoning, most commonly including incomplete mapping and maps requiring clarifications. Educating EPs on these processes will allow modification of their teaching modalities to better suit learners.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
Presented at the Canadian Conference on Medical Education (CCME), Halifax, Nova Scotia, May 2018, and the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians (CAEP) Conference, Calgary, Alberta, June 2018.
The authors have no potential conflicts to disclose.
The Hamilton Integrated Research Ethics Board granted approval for this study (#15‐246).
This work was funded by the McMaster Continuing Health Sciences Education Research Innovation Fund Grant.
ISSN:2472-5390
2472-5390
DOI:10.1002/aet2.10379