The development of self-regulated learning during the pre-clinical stage of medical school: a comparison between a lecture-based and a problem based curriculum

Society expects physicians to always improve their competencies and to be up to date with developments in their field. Therefore, an important aim of medical schools is to educate future medical doctors to become self-regulated, lifelong learners. However, it is unclear if medical students become better self-regulated learners during the pre-clinical stage of medical school, and whether students develop self-regulated learning skills differently, dependent on the educational approach of their medical school. In a cross-sectional design, we investigated the development of 384 medical students’ self-regulated learning skills with the use of the Self-Regulation of Learning Self-Report Scale. Next, we compared this development in students who enrolled in two distinct medical curricula: a problem-based curriculum and a lectured-based curriculum. Analysis showed that more skills decreased than increased during the pre-clinical stage of medical school, and that the difference between the curricula was mainly caused by a decrease in the skill evaluation in the lecture-based curriculum. These findings seem to suggest that, irrespective of the curriculum, self-regulated learning skills do not develop during medical school

'Immunising' physicians against availability bias in diagnostic reasoning: A randomised controlled experiment

Background: Diagnostic errors have often been attributed to biases in physicians' reasoning. Interventions to 'immunise' physicians against bias have focused on improving reasoning processes and have largely failed. Objective: To investigate the effect of increasing physicians' relevant knowledge on their susceptibility to availability bias. Design, settings and participants: Three-phase multicentre randomised experiment with second-year internal medicine residents from eight teaching hospitals in Brazil. Interventions: Immunisation: Physicians diagnosed one of two sets of vignettes (either diseases associated with chronic diarrhoea or with jaundice) and compared/contrasted alternative diagnoses with feedback. Biasing phase (1 week later): Physicians were biased towards either inflammatory bowel disease or viral hepatitis. Diagnostic performance test: All physicians diagnosed three vignettes resembling inflammatory bowel disease, three resembling hepatitis (however, all with different diagnoses). Physicians who increased their knowledge of either chronic diarrhoea or jaundice 1 week earlier were expected to resist the bias attempt. Main outcome measurements: Diagnostic accuracy, measured by test score (range 0-1), computed for subjected-to-bias and not-subjected-to-bias vignettes diagnosed by immunised and not-immunised physicians. Results: Ninety-one residents participated in the experiment. Diagnostic accuracy differed on subjected-to-bias vignettes, with immunised physicians performing better than non-immunised physicians (0.40 vs 0.24; difference in accuracy 0.16 (95% CI 0.05 to 0.27); p=0.004), but not on not-subjected-to-bias vignettes (0.36 vs 0.41; difference -0.05 (95% CI -0.17 to 0.08); p=0.45). Bias only hampered non-immunised physicians, who performed worse on subjected-to-bias than not-subjected-to-bias vignettes (difference -0.17 (95% CI -0.28 to -0.05); p=0.005); immunised physicians' accuracy did not differ (p=0.56). Conclusions: An intervention directed at increasing knowledge of clinical findings that discriminate between similar-looking diseases decreased physicians' susceptibility to availability bias, reducing diagnostic errors, in a simulated setting. Future research needs to examine the degree to which the intervention benefits other disease clusters and performance in clinical practice. Trial registration number: 68745917.1.1001.0068