Other Titles

Guided Collaborative Reflection as a Teaching Strategy to Reduce Cognitive Bias and Improve Diagnostic Decision Making: A Quasi-experimental Study [Slide Deck Title]

Abstract

Background and Significance: Diagnoses based on previous patient experiences, heuristics, and pattern recognition have the potential for leading to bias and misdiagnosis (Doherty, 2020). A teaching technique that has shown to be successful in improving Diagnostic Decision Making (DDM) is guided reflection (Prakash et al., 2019). According to Griffith et al. (2020, 2023), structured reflection demonstrated the most consistent improvement in diagnostic accuracy when studying medical and nurse practitioner students. Cognitive bias occurs when a healthcare provider selectively determines a diagnosis without considering alternatives (Doherty & Carroll, 2020). Numerous debiasing educational techniques have been explored noting mixed results (Tung & Melchiorre, 2023).

Purpose: The purpose of this study is compare teaching techniques to improve DDM.

Methods: A quasi-experimental study was performed using a random convenience sampling of nurse practitioner students. Students were randomly assigned to work in either a group (Experimental) or individually (Control) during instructor-guided case study analysis. Pre-test and post-test scores were compared between students who worked in a group during case study analysis and students who worked individually during the case study activities. An independent paired t-test was performed to compare mean scores from the two study groups using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) software. The significance level was set at p < .05.

Results: An independent-sample t-test was conducted to compare DDM improvement in the control versus experimental group. There was a significant difference in the mean scores between the control group (M=4.71, SD = 1.54) and the experimental group (M=5.46, SD= 1.82) conditions; t (656)= 5.71, p = <.001. The effect size range, measured by Cohen’s d, was d = .32 - 1.8, indicating a small to large effect range.

Conclusions: This study supports collaborative guided reflection as an effective technique to reduce cognitive bias and improve DDM.

Notes

References:

Doherty, T. S. & Carroll, A. E. (2020). Believing in overcoming cognitive bias, AMA Journal of Ethics, 22(9), 773-778.

Griffith, P. B., Doherty, C., Smeltzer, S. C., & Mariani, B. (2020). Education initiatives in cognitive debiasing to improve diagnostic accuracy in student providers: A scoping review. Journal of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners. 33(11), 862-871.

Griffith, P. B., Mariani, B., & Kelly, M. M. (2023). Diagnostic reasoning competency and accuracy by nurse practitioner students following the
use of structured reflection in simulation: A mixed-methods experiment. Nursing Education Perspectives, 44(6), 18-24.

Prakash, S., Sladek, R. M., & Schuwirth, L. (2019). Interventions to improve diagnostic decision making: A systematic review and meta-
analysis on reflective strategies. Medical Teacher, 41(5), 517-524. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159x.2018.1497786

Tung, A. & Melchiorre, M. (2023). Debiasing and educational interventions in medical diagnosis: A systematic review. University of Toronto Medical Journal, 100(1), 48-57. https://doi.org/10.33137/utmj.v100i1.38937

Description

Diagnostic Decision Making (DDM) is a critical skill to foster in advanced practice nursing education through various teaching techniques. This research study compared two different teaching techniques to determine which is the most effective at reducing cognitive bias and improve DDM.

Author Details

Daniel Forrest Hatch, DNP

Sigma Membership

Iota Mu

Type

Presentation

Format Type

Text-based Document

Study Design/Type

Quasi-Experimental Study, Other

Research Approach

Other

Keywords:

Teaching and Learning Strategies, Curriculum Development

Conference Name

36th International Nursing Research Congress

Conference Host

Sigma Theta Tau International

Conference Location

Seattle, Washington, USA

Conference Year

2025

Rights Holder

All rights reserved by the author(s) and/or publisher(s) listed in this item record unless relinquished in whole or part by a rights notation or a Creative Commons License present in this item record.

Review Type

Abstract Review Only: Reviewed by Event Host

Acquisition

Proxy-submission

Click on the above link to access the slide deck.

Share

COinS
 

Teaching Strategies to Reduce Cognitive Bias in Diagnostic Decisions: A Quasi-Experimental Study

Seattle, Washington, USA

Background and Significance: Diagnoses based on previous patient experiences, heuristics, and pattern recognition have the potential for leading to bias and misdiagnosis (Doherty, 2020). A teaching technique that has shown to be successful in improving Diagnostic Decision Making (DDM) is guided reflection (Prakash et al., 2019). According to Griffith et al. (2020, 2023), structured reflection demonstrated the most consistent improvement in diagnostic accuracy when studying medical and nurse practitioner students. Cognitive bias occurs when a healthcare provider selectively determines a diagnosis without considering alternatives (Doherty & Carroll, 2020). Numerous debiasing educational techniques have been explored noting mixed results (Tung & Melchiorre, 2023).

Purpose: The purpose of this study is compare teaching techniques to improve DDM.

Methods: A quasi-experimental study was performed using a random convenience sampling of nurse practitioner students. Students were randomly assigned to work in either a group (Experimental) or individually (Control) during instructor-guided case study analysis. Pre-test and post-test scores were compared between students who worked in a group during case study analysis and students who worked individually during the case study activities. An independent paired t-test was performed to compare mean scores from the two study groups using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) software. The significance level was set at p < .05.

Results: An independent-sample t-test was conducted to compare DDM improvement in the control versus experimental group. There was a significant difference in the mean scores between the control group (M=4.71, SD = 1.54) and the experimental group (M=5.46, SD= 1.82) conditions; t (656)= 5.71, p = <.001. The effect size range, measured by Cohen’s d, was d = .32 - 1.8, indicating a small to large effect range.

Conclusions: This study supports collaborative guided reflection as an effective technique to reduce cognitive bias and improve DDM.