Clinical Judgment Item Development for Emergency Medical Service Clinicians.

Objectives: While clinical judgment is vital for all clinicians, it is not clearly assessed in initial or continuing emergency medical services (EMS) education due to unclear definitions. Recently, clarity of this concept has been provided through the development of a theoretical framework for clinical judgment in EMS that considers the broad and evolving nature of prehospital care delivery. To facilitate standardization of clinical judgment assessments, in this educational practice review we present a template for item development leveraging the new framework.

Evaluating the Application of an EMS Clinical Judgment Theoretical Framework.

Objectives: Clinical judgment (CJ) encompasses clinical reasoning (process of evaluating a problem) and clinical decision-making (choice made). A theoretical model to better define emergency medical services (EMS) CJ has been developed but its use has not been evaluated in EMS training and assessments. Our objective was to evaluate the performance of this EMS CJ model to assess clinical reasoning and decision-making in a simulated environment.

Examining the Reliability and Validity of the ALS Certification Examinations with the Inclusion of Clinical Judgment: An Update on the ALS Examination Redesign.

Objectives: Clinical judgment describes the process an emergency medical service clinician uses to evaluate problems and make decisions in the out-of-hospital setting. As part of the redesign of the Advanced Life Support (ALS) certification examinations, the National Registry of Emergency Medical Technicians is developing and evaluating items that measure clinical judgment, with the intention of assessing these as a new domain in the ALS certification examinations. In this study, we provide evidence around the redesign by evaluating the reliability and validity of the advanced emergency medical technician (AEMT) and paramedic certification examinations when clinical judgment is included as a sixth domain along with the five current domains.

Systematic review and meta-analyses: What has the application of Mendelian randomization told us about the causal effect of adiposity on health outcomes?

Mendelian randomization (MR) is increasingly used for generating estimates of the causal impact of exposures on outcomes. Evidence suggests a causal role of excess adipose tissue (adiposity) on many health outcomes. However, this body of work has not been systematically appraised.