Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Neural basis of nonanalytical reasoning expertise during clinical evaluation

  • S.J. Durning
  • , Michelle Costanzo
  • , Anthony Artino
  • , John Graner
  • , Cees van der Vleuten
  • , Thomas Beckman
  • , Christopher Wittich
  • , Michael Roy
  • , Eric Holmboe
  • , Lambertus Schuwirth

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    21 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    Introduction: Understanding clinical reasoning is essential for patient care and medical education. Dual-processing theory suggests that nonanalytic reasoning is an essential aspect of expertise; however, assessing nonanalytic reasoning is challenging because it is believed to occur on the subconscious level. This assumption makes concurrent verbal protocols less reliable assessment tools. Methods: Functional magnetic resonance imaging was used to explore the neural basis of nonanalytic reasoning in internal medicine interns (novices) and board-certified staff internists (experts) while completing United States Medical Licensing Examination and American Board of Internal Medicine multiple-choice questions. Results: The results demonstrated that novices and experts share a common neural network in addition to nonoverlapping neural resources. However, experts manifested greater neural processing efficiency in regions such as the prefrontal cortex during nonanalytical reasoning. Conclusions: These findings reveal a multinetwork system that supports the dual-process mode of expert clinical reasoning during medical evaluation.

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)10
    Number of pages10
    JournalBrain and Behavior
    Volume5
    Issue number3
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 1 Mar 2015

    Keywords

    • Dual-process theory
    • Expertise
    • Functional MRI
    • Medical education
    • Neural efficiency
    • Nonanalytical reasoning

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Neural basis of nonanalytical reasoning expertise during clinical evaluation'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this