Centre de Documentation Campus Montignies
Horaires :
Lundi : 8h-18h30
Mardi : 8h-17h30
Mercredi 9h-16h30
Jeudi : 8h30-18h30
Vendredi : 8h30-12h30 et 13h-14h30
Votre centre de documentation sera exceptionnellement fermé de 12h30 à 13h ce lundi 18 novembre.
Egalement, il sera fermé de 12h30 à 13h30 ce mercredi 20 novembre.
Lundi : 8h-18h30
Mardi : 8h-17h30
Mercredi 9h-16h30
Jeudi : 8h30-18h30
Vendredi : 8h30-12h30 et 13h-14h30
Votre centre de documentation sera exceptionnellement fermé de 12h30 à 13h ce lundi 18 novembre.
Egalement, il sera fermé de 12h30 à 13h30 ce mercredi 20 novembre.
Bienvenue sur le catalogue du centre de documentation du campus de Montignies.
Détail de l'auteur
Auteur Anne Baker |
Documents disponibles écrits par cet auteur
Ajouter le résultat dans votre panier Faire une suggestion Affiner la recherche
A systematic review of professional reasoning literature in occupational therapy / Carolyn Unsworth in The British Journal of Occupational Therapy, Vol.79 N°1 (January 2016)
[article]
Titre : A systematic review of professional reasoning literature in occupational therapy Type de document : texte imprimé Auteurs : Carolyn Unsworth ; Anne Baker Année de publication : 2016 Article en page(s) : p.5-16 Langues : Anglais (eng) Mots-clés : clinical reasoning novice-expert differences professional reasoning Résumé :
Introduction Over the past 33 years, theoretical and empirical articles have been published on professional reasoning in occupational therapy. This systematic review sought to answer two questions: (1) What is the nature and volume of professional reasoning literature; and (2) What do we know about the development of professional reasoning in students through literature exploring novice and expert differences?
Method A systematic review of the peer-reviewed literature with narrative and critical analysis.
Findings A total of 140 articles were classified into six topic areas: what is professional reasoning, ethics and moral reasoning?, methods of studying professional reasoning, novice–expert differences, professional reasoning of assistants, and advancing specific fields of practice using professional reasoning. Of these, 68% included analysis of data, and the remainder were discussions. Fourteen articles examining novice–expert differences were critiqued but only eight were rated as strong. Research findings prompt the need for reflection, extended fieldwork, and development of protocols to facilitate reasoning.
Conclusion This is the first systematic review of the professional reasoning literature, and provides a foundation for more detailed critiques of specific topics to be undertaken. While research strengths have been identified, gaps include the use of standardised measures of professional reasoning and identification of educational approaches that promote professional reasoning.
Permalink : ./index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=42367
in The British Journal of Occupational Therapy > Vol.79 N°1 (January 2016) . - p.5-16[article] A systematic review of professional reasoning literature in occupational therapy [texte imprimé] / Carolyn Unsworth ; Anne Baker . - 2016 . - p.5-16.
Langues : Anglais (eng)
in The British Journal of Occupational Therapy > Vol.79 N°1 (January 2016) . - p.5-16
Mots-clés : clinical reasoning novice-expert differences professional reasoning Résumé :
Introduction Over the past 33 years, theoretical and empirical articles have been published on professional reasoning in occupational therapy. This systematic review sought to answer two questions: (1) What is the nature and volume of professional reasoning literature; and (2) What do we know about the development of professional reasoning in students through literature exploring novice and expert differences?
Method A systematic review of the peer-reviewed literature with narrative and critical analysis.
Findings A total of 140 articles were classified into six topic areas: what is professional reasoning, ethics and moral reasoning?, methods of studying professional reasoning, novice–expert differences, professional reasoning of assistants, and advancing specific fields of practice using professional reasoning. Of these, 68% included analysis of data, and the remainder were discussions. Fourteen articles examining novice–expert differences were critiqued but only eight were rated as strong. Research findings prompt the need for reflection, extended fieldwork, and development of protocols to facilitate reasoning.
Conclusion This is the first systematic review of the professional reasoning literature, and provides a foundation for more detailed critiques of specific topics to be undertaken. While research strengths have been identified, gaps include the use of standardised measures of professional reasoning and identification of educational approaches that promote professional reasoning.
Permalink : ./index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=42367 Exemplaires (2)
Cote Support Localisation Section Disponibilité Revue Revue Centre de Documentation HELHa Campus Montignies Armoires à volets Document exclu du prêt - à consulter sur place
Exclu du prêtRevue Revue Centre de Documentation HELHa Campus Montignies Armoires à volets Document exclu du prêt - à consulter sur place
Exclu du prêt