Search

Context: The script concordance test (SCT), designed to measure clinical reasoning in complex cases, has recently been the subject of several critical research studies. Amongst other issues, response process validity evidence remains lacking. We explored the response processes of experts on an SCT scoring panel to better understand their seemingly divergent beliefs about how new clinical data alter the suitability of proposed actions within simulated patient cases., Methods: A total of 10 Argentine gastroenterologists who served as the expert panel on an existing SCT re-answered 15 cases 9 months after their original panel participation. They then answered questions probing their reasoning and reactions to other experts' perspectives., Results: The experts sometimes noted they would not ordinarily consider the actions proposed for the cases at all (30/150 instances [20%]) or would collect additional data first (54/150 instances [36%]). Even when groups of experts agreed about how new clinical data in a case affected the suitability of a proposed action, there was often disagreement (118/133 instances [89%]) about the suitability of the proposed action before the new clinical data had been introduced. Experts reported confidence in their responses, but showed limited consistency with the responses they had given 9 months earlier (linear weighted kappa = 0.33). Qualitative analyses showed nuanced and complex reasons behind experts' responses, revealing, for example, that experts often considered the unique affordances and constraints of their varying local practice environments when responding. Experts generally found other experts' alternative responses moderately compelling (mean ± standard deviation 2.93 ± 0.80 on a 5-point scale, where 3 = moderately compelling). Experts switched their own preferred responses after seeing others' reasoning in 30 of 150 (20%) instances., Conclusions: Expert response processes were not consistent with the classical interpretation and use of SCT scores. However, several fruitful and justifiable alternatives for the use of SCT-like methods are proposed, such as to guide assessments for learning., (© 2019 John Wiley & Sons Ltd and The Association for the Study of Medical Education.)

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the incidence and clinical features of de novo tumors in patients undergoing liver transplantation in our center as well as to assess survival. We retrospectively analyzed 168 liver transplantations (159 patients) performed from May 2006 to May 2014. The incidence of de novo tumors was 7.5% (n = 12). The mean age at diagnosis was 63 ± 7 years. The most frequent neoplasms were non melanoma skin tumors and adenocarcinomas. Fifty percent of the tumors developed in the second and third year after transplantation. Type of immunosuppression did not influence tumoral type, although most patients receive tacrolimus in combination with mycofenolate and/or corticoids. The mean duration of follow-up after diagnosis of the tumor was 25 ± 29 months (range 0-76) and the mortality was 41%. The actuarial probability of survival at 1 and 5 years was 83 and 55%, respectively. De novo tumors are frequent after liver transplantation and their clinical course differs from that in the general population. Because their clinical course is more aggressive, regular follow up of these patients is essential for early diagnosis.