LinkedIn

 آمار

تعداد نشریات20
تعداد شماره‌ها1,225
تعداد مقالات11,164
تعداد مشاهده مقاله77,019,242
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله101,197,316
SOURINEJAD, HADIS, ADIB MOGHADDAM, ELHAM, RAEISI DEHKORDI, SAYED AHMAD REZA, RAISI DEHKORDI, ZIBA. (1404). The Cognitive Error Styles of Midwifery Students in Clinical Decision-Making: A Directed Qualitative Content Analysis Study. سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 13(4), 334-343. doi: 10.30476/jamp.2025.107111.2191
HADIS SOURINEJAD; ELHAM ADIB MOGHADDAM; SAYED AHMAD REZA RAEISI DEHKORDI; ZIBA RAISI DEHKORDI. "The Cognitive Error Styles of Midwifery Students in Clinical Decision-Making: A Directed Qualitative Content Analysis Study". سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 13, 4, 1404, 334-343. doi: 10.30476/jamp.2025.107111.2191
SOURINEJAD, HADIS, ADIB MOGHADDAM, ELHAM, RAEISI DEHKORDI, SAYED AHMAD REZA, RAISI DEHKORDI, ZIBA. (1404). 'The Cognitive Error Styles of Midwifery Students in Clinical Decision-Making: A Directed Qualitative Content Analysis Study', سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 13(4), pp. 334-343. doi: 10.30476/jamp.2025.107111.2191
SOURINEJAD, HADIS, ADIB MOGHADDAM, ELHAM, RAEISI DEHKORDI, SAYED AHMAD REZA, RAISI DEHKORDI, ZIBA. The Cognitive Error Styles of Midwifery Students in Clinical Decision-Making: A Directed Qualitative Content Analysis Study. سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 1404; 13(4): 334-343. doi: 10.30476/jamp.2025.107111.2191

The Cognitive Error Styles of Midwifery Students in Clinical Decision-Making: A Directed Qualitative Content Analysis Study

Journal of Advances in Medical Education & Professionalism
دوره 13، شماره 4، دی 2025، صفحه 334-343    اصل مقاله (563.55 K)
نوع مقاله: Original Article
شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.30476/jamp.2025.107111.2191
نویسندگان
HADIS SOURINEJAD1؛ ELHAM ADIB MOGHADDAM2؛ SAYED AHMAD REZA RAEISI DEHKORDI3؛ ZIBA RAISI DEHKORDI* 4
1Department of Midwifery, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Lorestan University of Medical Sciences, Khoramabad, Iran
2Counseling and Reproductive Health Research Center, Golestan University of Medical Sciences, Gorgan, Iran
3Department of Science, Shahreza Campus, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran
4Community-Oriented Nursing Midwifery Research Center, Nursing and Midwifery School, Shahrekord University of Medical Sciences, Shahrekord, Iran
چکیده
Introduction: Cognitive error styles refer to faulty patterns of thinking that can negatively influence individuals’ decision-making and behavior. Among midwifery students, identifying and understanding these errors is particularly important, as their decisions directly impact maternal and neonatal outcomes. Thus, the present study aimed to explain the cognitive error styles of midwifery students in clinical decision-making.
Methods: This qualitative study was carried out using a directed qualitative content analysis approach. Initially, empirical literature and studies from databases such as ERIC, PubMed, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, and Scopus were reviewed to identify relevant components of cognitive error styles among midwifery students. Next, unstructured and semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 midwifery students (bachelor’s and master’s levels) enrolled at Shahrekord University of Medical Sciences, Iran, from August 2023 to May 2024.
Results: Among 32 main categories extracted from the literature review, 11 functional components of cognitive error styles were confirmed by the midwifery students, including emotional reasoning, procrastination, lack of confidence, anchoring , recency bias, catastrophizing, stereotyping, negative filtering, labeling, fortune telling, and all-or-nothing thinking.
Conclusions: Given the significant impact of cognitive error styles on clinical decision-making by midwives and midwifery students, it is essential to identify the causes of medical errors associated with these cognitive biases to minimize mistakes and their related financial consequences. A deeper understanding of these errors can ameliorate the education and clinical performance of midwifery students, ultimately enhancing healthcare delivery.

تازه های تحقیق
کلیدواژه‌ها
Midwifery؛ Students؛ Cognition؛ Diagnostic errors؛ Qualitative research
مراجع
  1. Yazdani S, Hoseini Abardeh M. Five decades of research and theorization on clinical reasoning: a critical review. Adv Med Educ Pract. 2019;10:703-16.
  2. Hayward RA. Counting deaths due to medical errors. JAMA. 2002;288(19):2404.
  3. Graber ML, Wachter RM, Cassel CK. Bringing diagnosis into the quality and safety equations. JAMA. 2012;308(12):1211-2.
  4. Crupi V, Elia F. Understanding and improving decisions in clinical medicine (I): reasoning, heuristics, and error. Intern Emerg Med. 2017;12(5):689-91.
  5. Boyle DJ. Cognitive errors. In: Patient Safety in Surgery. Cham: Springer; 2014. p.19-32.
  6. Koç E, Birsen A. Determination of knowledge and attitudes of midwifery and nursing intern students about medical malpractice. J Clin Nurs. 2017;26(21-22):3404-12.
  7. Muoni T. Decision-making, intuition, and the midwife: understanding heuristics. Br J Midwifery. 2012;20(1):52-6.
  8. Cheraghi A, Riazi H, Emamhadi M, Jambarsang S. Occupational factors related to midwifery faults from the viewpoint of midwives working in Tehran city, Iran. Iran J Forensic Med. 2020;26(2):131-7.
  9. Kruk ME, Kujawski S, Mbaruku G, Ramsey K, Moyo W, Borghi J, et al. Role of nurses and midwives in improving patient safety during childbirth: evidence from obstetric trauma in OECD countries. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2020;20:739.
  10. Sakala BK. Factors influencing midwifery clinical decision-making. Int Ann Sci. 2019;7(1):28-32.
  11. Halimi FN, Zolkefli Y. When student midwives make clinical mistakes: a qualitative study in Brunei Darussalam. Int J Care Scholars. 2024;7(1):54-63.
  12. Panda S, Dash M, John J, Rath K, Debata A, Swain D, et al. Challenges faced by student nurses and midwives in clinical learning environment: a systematic review and meta-synthesis. Nurse Educ Today. 2021;101:104875.
  13. Lee JJ, Clarke CL, Carson MN. Nursing students’ learning dynamics and influencing factors in clinical contexts. Nurs Educ Pract. 2018;29:103-9.
  14. Santos APS. Nursing students' errors in clinical learning: qualitative outcomes in mixed methods research. Rev Bras Enferm. 2019;72(1):170-6.
  15. Parhoodeh F, Erfani N, Parhoodeh F. A reflection on the qualitative research approach with emphasis on validity and reliability. Pouyesh Hum Educ. 2022;8(28):19-44.
  16. Kyngäs H, Mikkonen K, Kääriäinen M. The application of content analysis in nursing science research. Cham: Springer; 2019.
  17. Saeedi MT, Arbabi M. The role of cognitive biases in medical errors: a review of the literature, concepts and definitions. J Clin Med. 2021;10(2):412.
  18. O'Sullivan ED, Schofield S. Cognitive bias in clinical medicine. J R Coll Physicians Edinb. 2018;48(3):225-32.
  19. Saposnik G, Redelmeier D, Ruff CC, Tobler PN. Cognitive biases associated with medical decisions: a systematic review. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2016;16:138.
  20. Jefford E, Fahy K, Sundin D. Decision-making theories and their usefulness to the midwifery profession both in terms of midwifery practice and the education of midwives. Int J Nurs Pract. 2011;17(3):246-53.
  21. Stiegler MP, Tung A. Cognitive processes in anesthesiology decision making. Anesthesiology. 2014;120(1):204-17.
  22. Farhadi N, Ezati M, Shojaie AA, Hatami J, Salehi K. Cognitive errors associated with medical decision-making: a systematic review. Curr Psychosom Res. 2022;1(1):28-49.
  23. Deveau MZ, Redmond S. Exploring cognitive biases and clinical reasoning during simulation with BScN students. Clin Simul Nurs. 2021;61:1-5.
  24. Daemers DOA, van Limbeek EBM, Wijnen HAA, Nieuwenhuijze MJ, de Vries RG. Factors influencing the clinical decision making of midwives: a qualitative study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2017;17:345.
  25. Cioffi J, Markham R. Clinical decision making by midwives: managing case complexity. J Adv Nurs. 1997;25(2):265-72.
  26. Al Moteri MO, Cooper S, Symmons M, Plummer V. Nurses’ cognitive and perceptual bias in the identification of clinical deterioration cues. Aust Crit Care. 2020;33(4):333-42.
  27. Daemers DOA, van Limbeek EBM, Wijnen HAA, Nieuwenhuijze MJ, de Vries RG. Influencing factors in midwives’ decision-making during childbirth: a qualitative study in the Netherlands. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2018;18:331.
  28. Hunter B, Warren L. Midwives’ experiences of workplace resilience. Midwifery. 2014;30(8):926-34.
  29. Asadi L, Dafei M, Mojahed S, Safinejad H. Clinical error management training for midwifery students in Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd. J Educ Health Promot. 2021;10:33.
  30. Van Geene R, van der Meer M, de Bruin ABH, van Gog T. The role of experiential learning in raising awareness of cognitive biases during diagnostic reasoning. Med Educ. 2016;50(4):417-25.
  31. Lendahls L, Oscarsson MG. Midwifery students' experiences of simulation- and skills training. Nurse Educ Today. 2017;50:12-6.
  32. Mbakaya BC, Kalembo FW, Zgambo M, Konyani A, Lungu F, Tveit B, et al. Nursing and midwifery students’ experiences and perception of their clinical learning environment in Malawi: a mixed-method study. BMC Nurs. 2020;19:116.
  33. Awanzo A, Thompson J. Cognitive biases in clinical decision-making in prehospital critical care: a scoping review. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2025;33(1):101.
  34. Croskerry P. From mindless to mindful practice—cognitive bias and clinical decision making. N Engl J Med. 2013;368(26):2445-8.
  35. Scholes J, Endacott R, Biro M, Bulle B, Cooper S, Miles M, et al. Clinical decision-making: midwifery students' recognition of, and response to, post-partum haemorrhage in the simulation environment. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2012;12:19.
  36. Botma Y, Nyoni C. What went wrong? A critical reflection on educator midwives’ inability to transfer education knowledge. J Nurs Educ Pract. 2015;5(6):1-8.
  37. Lambe KA, O'Reilly G, Kelly BD, Curristan S. Dual-process cognitive interventions to enhance diagnostic reasoning: a systematic review. BMJ Qual Saf. 2016;25(10):808-20.
  38. Arefi MF, Pajohideh Z, Pouya AB. A qualitative and quantitative assessment of the risk of human errors in midwifery tasks in child delivery ward using engineering approach (EA) and predictive human errors analysis (PHEA). Malays J Med Health Sci. 2020;16(3):60-7.
آمار
تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 4
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 4


سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی. قدرت گرفته از سیناوب