EDP Sciences logo
Subscriber Authentication Point
Rechercher
Menu
Accueil Tous les numéros Volume 23 / Numéro 1 (2022) Pédagogie Médicale, 23 1 (2022) 17-26 References
Free Access
Issue
Pédagogie Médicale
Volume 23, Number 1, 2022
Page(s) 17 - 26
Section Recherche et Perspectives
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/pmed/2022003
Published online 11 mai 2022
  1. Higgs J, Jones MA. Clinical decision making and multiple problem spaces. In: Higgs J, Jones M, Loftus S, Christensen N (Eds.). Clinical reasoning in the health professions. Edinburgh: Elsevier Ltd, 2008:3‐17. [Google Scholar]
  2. Nendaz M, Charlin B, Leblanc V, Bordage G. Le raisonnement clinique : données issues de la recherche et implications pour l’enseignement. Pédagogie Médicale 2005;6:235‐54. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  3. Charlin B, Boshuizen H, Custers E, Feltovich P. Scripts and clinical reasoning. Med Educ 2007;41:1178‐84. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Norman G. Research in clinical reasoning: Past history and current trends. Med Educ 2005;39:418‐27. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Kahneman D. Thinking, fast and slow. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  6. Cairo Notari S, Sader J, Caire Fon N, Sommer J, Pereira Miozzari AC, Janjic D et al. Understanding GPs’ clinical reasoning processes involved in managing patients suffering from multimorbidity: A systematic review of qualitative and quantitative research. Int J Clin Pract 2021;75:e14187. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Ilgen JS, Eva KW, Regehr G. What’s in a label? Is diagnosis the start or the end of clinical reasoning? J Gen Intern Med 2016;31:435‐7. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Audétat Voirol M-C, Sader J, Cairo Notari S, Ritz C, Fon NC, Maisonneuve H, et al. Understanding and promoting clinical reasoning in chronic and multimorbid conditions: A call for GPs and healthcare professionals. Health 2019;11:1338‐1346. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  9. Cook DA, Sherbino J, Durning SJ. Management reasoning: Beyond the diagnosis. JAMA 2018;319:2267‐8. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Cook DA, Durning SJ, Sherbino J, Gruppen LD. Management reasoning: Implications for health professions educators and a research agenda. Acad Med 2019;94:1310‐6. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Sinnige J, Korevaar JC, van Lieshout J, Westert GP, Schellevis FG, Braspenning JC. Medication management strategy for older people with polypharmacy in general practice: A qualitative study on prescribing behaviour in primary care. Br J Gen Pract 2016;66:e540‐e551. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Sinnott C, Mc Hugh S, Browne J. GPs’ perspectives on the management of patients with multimorbidity: Systematic review and synthesis of qualitative research. BMJ Open 2013;3:e003610. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Excoffier S, Herzig L, N’Goran AA, Deruaz-Luyet A, Haller D. Prevalence of multimorbidity in general practice: A cross-sectional study within the Swiss sentinel surveillance system (Sentinella). BMJ Open 2018;8:e019616. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Montague T, Gogovor A, Aylen J, Ashley L, Ahmed S, Martin L et al. Patient-centred care in Canada: Key components and the path forward. Healthc Q 2017;20:50‐6. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Excoffier S, Paschoud A, Haller D, Herzig L. Multimorbidité en médecine de famille. Rev Med Suisse 2016;12:917‐21. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Luijks H, Lucassen P, van Weel C, et al. How GPs value guidelines applied to patients with multimorbidity: A qualitative study. BMJ Open 2015;5:e007905. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Ritz C, Sader J, Cairo Notari S, Lanier C, Caire Fond N, Nendaz M et al. Multimorbidity & clinical reasoning through the eyes of GPs: A qualitative study. Fam Med Commun Health 2021;9:e000798. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Lakoff G, Johnson M. Metaphors we live by. London: University of Chicago Press, 1980. [Google Scholar]
  19. Sontag S. Illness as metaphor. New York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux, 1978. [Google Scholar]
  20. Lakoff G. The contemporary theory of metaphor. In: A. Ortony (Ed.). Metaphor and thought (2nd ed.). Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University Press, 1993:202‐51. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  21. Boroditsky L. Metaphoric structuring: Understanding time through spatial metaphors. Cognition 2000;75:1‐28. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Hillman J. Healing fiction. Putnam (CT): Spring Publications, 1983. [Google Scholar]
  23. Fauconnier G. Mappings in thought and language. Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University Press, 1997. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  24. Feldman I. From molecules to metaphors: The neural theory of language. Cambridge (MA): The MIT Press (A Bradford book), 2006. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  25. Schmitt R. Systematic metaphor analysis as a method of qualitative research. Qual Rep 2005;10:358‐94. [Google Scholar]
  26. Audétat M-C, Cairo Notari S, Sader J, Ritz C, Fassier T, Sommer JM et al. Understanding the clinical reasoning processes involved in the management of multimorbidity in an ambulatory setting: Study protocol of a stimulated recall research. BMC Med Educ 2021;21:31. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Graneheim UH, Lundman B. Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: Concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Educ Today 2004;24:105‐12. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Braun V, Clarke V. Conceptual and design thinking for thematic analysis. Qual Psychol 2021. https://doi.org/10.1037/qup0000196. [Google Scholar]
  29. Blumenberg H. Schiffbruch mit Zuschauer. Paradigma einer Daseinsmetapher (3rd ed.). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, 1988. [Google Scholar]
  30. Kleist C (von). Zur Verwendung von Metaphern in den Selbstdarstellungen von Psychotherapieklienten. In: JB Bergold, U Flick (Eds.), Einsichten. Zugänge zur Sicht des Subjekts mittels qualitativer Forschung. Tübingen: DGVT, 1987:115‐24. [Google Scholar]
  31. Boyd C, Darer J, Boult C, Fried LP, Boult L, Wu AW. Clinical practice guidelines and quality of care for older patients with multiple comorbid diseases: Implications for pay for performance. JAMA 2005;294:716‐24. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Rees CE, Knight LV, Wilkinson CE. Doctors being up there and we being down here: A metaphorical analysis of talk about student/doctor-patient relationships. Soc Sci Med 2007;65:725‐37. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Lubarsky S, Dory V, Audétat M-C, Custers E, Charlin B. Using script theory to cultivate illness script formation and clinical reasoning in health professions education. Can Med Educ J 2015;6:e61‐e70. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  34. Wagner EH. Chronic disease management: What will it take to improve care for chronic illness? Eff Clin Pract 1998;1:2‐4. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Schuling J, Gebben H, Veehof LJG, Haaijer-Ruskamp FM. Deprescribing medication in very elderly patients with multimorbidity: The view of Dutch GPs. A qualitative study. BMC Fam Pract 2012;13:56. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Audétat M-C, Laurin S, Dory V, Charlin B, Nendaz M. Diagnostic et prise en charge des difficultés de raisonnement clinique. Guide AMEE no 117 (version courte). Première partie : supervision du raisonnement clinique et diagnostic pédagogique. Pédagogie Médicale 2017;18:129‐38. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  37. Fabri PJ. Lessons learned at sea – Ocean sailing as a metaphor for surgical training. Am J Surg 2003;186:249‐52. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Nevalainen M, Kuikka L, Sjoberg L, Eriksson J, Pitkala K. Tolerance of uncertainty and fears of making mistakes among fifth-year medical students. Fam Med 2012;44:240‐6. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Witt EE, Onorato SE, Schwartzstein RM. Medical students and the drive for a single right answer: Teaching complexity and uncertainty. ATS Sch 2021. https://doi.org/10.34197/ats-scholar.2021-0083PS. [Google Scholar]
  40. Moffett J, Hammond J, Murphy P, Pawlikowska T. The ubiquity of uncertainty: A scoping review on how undergraduate health professions’ students engage with uncertainty. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract 2021;26:913‐58. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Overoye AL, Storm BC. Harnessing the power of uncertainty to enhance learning. Transl Issues Psychol Sci 2015;1:140. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  42. Lodge JM, Kennedy G, Lockyer L, Arguel A, Pachman M. Understanding difficulties and resulting confusion in learning: An integrative review. Front Educ 2018;3:49. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  43. Wayne S, Dellmore D, Serna L, Jerabek R, Timm C, Kalishman S. The association between intolerance of ambiguity and decline in medical students’ attitudes toward the underserved. Acad Med 2011;86:877‐882. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. Moffett J, Hammond J, Murphy P, Pawlikowska T. The ubiquity of uncertainty: A scoping review on how undergraduate health professions’ students engage with uncertainty. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract 2021;26:913‐58. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Bochatay N, Bajwa NM. Learning to manage uncertainty: Supervision, trust and autonomy in residency training. Sociol Health Illn 2020;42(Suppl. 1):145‐59. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  46. Nendaz M, Charlin B, Leblanc V, Bordage G. Le raisonnement clinique : données issues de la recherche et implications pour l’enseignement. Pédagogie Médicale 2005;6:235‐54. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  47. Bordage G. Elaborated knowledge: A key to successful diagnostic thinking. Acad Med 1994;69:883‐5. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Bowen J. Educational strategies to promote clinical diagnostic reasoning. N Engl J Med 2006;355:2217‐25. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  49. Stewart M. Reflections on the doctor-patient relationship: From evidence and experience. Br J Gen Pract 2005;55:793‐801. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Lussier M-T, Richard C. Because one shoe doesn’t fit all: A repertoire of doctor-patient relationships. Can Fam Physician 2008;54:1089‐92. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  51. Turner M. Reading minds: The study of English in the age of cognitive science. Princeton (NJ): Princeton University Press. 1991. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  52. Talmy L. Toward a cognitive linguistics. Cambridge (MA): MIT Press, 2000. [Google Scholar]
  53. Taub S. Language from the body: Iconicity and metaphor in American sign language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001. [Google Scholar]
  54. Stewart M, Belle Brown J, Wayne Weston W, McWhinney IR, McWilliam CL, Freeman TR. Patient-centered medicine – Transforming the clinical method (2nd ed.). Oxford: Radcliffe Medical Press, 2003. [Google Scholar]
  55. Julia M-A (dir.). Nouveaux horizons sur l’espace antique et moderne (Nouvelle édition). Pessac : Ausonius Éditions, 2015. https://doi.org/10.4000/books.ausonius.5238. [Google Scholar]
  56. Starfield B. New paradigms for quality in primary care. Br J Gen Pract 2001;51:303‐9. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  57. Van den Akker MBF, Knottnerus JA. Comorbidity or multimorbidity: What’s in a name? A review of literature. Eur J Gen Pract 1996;2:65‐70. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  58. Dory V, Audétat M-C. Ils sont carrément incurables : comment les cliniciens enseignants perçoivent leur gestion des difficultés de raisonnement clinique de leurs internes. Pédagogie Médicale 2013;14:83‐97. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  59. Goldstein LS. Becoming a teacher as a hero’s journey: Using metaphor in preservice teacher education. Teach Educ Q 2005;32:7‐24. [Google Scholar]
  60. Rees CE, Knight LV, Cleland JA. Medical educators’ metaphoric talk about their assessment relationships with students: “you don’t want to sort of be the one who sticks the knife in them”. Assess Eval High Educ 2009;34:455‐67. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  61. Fernandez-Duque D, Johnson M. Attention metaphors: Flow metaphors guide the cognitive psychology of attention. Cognit Sci 1999;23:83‐116. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.