Intervention skills – a neglected field of research in medical education and beyond

Abstract

reasoning as a critical component of clinical reasoning has been understudied in medical education in contrast to the well-established field of diagnostic reasoning. This resonates in a lack of comprehensive understanding of the cognitive processes involved and a deficit in research to promote intervention skills in future clinicians. In this commentary, we present a conceptual framework for intervention reasoning that includes four phases: generating, selecting, implementing, and evaluating interventions. The conceptualization highlights cognitive processes such as developing interventions based on a patient’s diagnosis and signs and symptoms; selecting the most appropriate option by contrasting, prioritizing, and evaluating interventions in terms of feasibility, effectiveness, and the patient’s context-specific needs; and predicting patient outcomes within so-called “developmental corridors” to adjust treatments accordingly. In addition to these cognitive processes, interventions require collaborative activities, such as sharing information with other care providers, distributing roles among care teams, or acting together. Future research should validate the proposed framework, examine the impact of intervention reasoning on clinical outcomes, and identify effective training methods (e.g., simulation and AI-based approaches). In addition, it would be valuable to explore the transferability and generalizability of the model to other areas of health education and contexts outside of health education.

Keywords

• intervention reasoning
• cognitive intervention processes
• clinical reasoning
• health education