NUR1048 Clinical Judgment and Decision Making Assignment Brief | DCU

Assignment Brief

Analysis of own clinical judgment and decision making in regards to a paper-based patient scenario

Your analysis for this module is based on a paper-based patient scenario (vignette) that you either receive or develop during the semester in class. You will be asked to ‘think aloud’ about a patient scenario and provide your judgments and decisions for this case (think aloud protocol). Choose one (or more, max. 3) clinical judgment and decision-making topic/s from your think-aloud protocol, and provide the theoretical background using relevant research and literature sources to these topics. Then, analyse your answers from the think-aloud protocol relating to the chosen topics and theoretical background, i.e. Why would you judge and decide like that? How did you come to this judgment and/or decision? What theoretical concepts/notions influenced your judgment and/or decision, and why? Explore the alternatives such as different judgments and decisions, which could be suitable in this case within the analysis. Always provide your rationale/s. Reference to relevant research literature is to be made throughout the entire paper. The subject of the case analysis is you and your clinical judgments and decision-making about the paper-based patient scenario.

Some examples as to the topics and underlying concepts, which you may want to explore are as follows: Modes of engagement (e.g. paternalistic, information-based, shared decision making), use of clinical information in CJDM e.g. quantitative and qualitative ques/data, observation, decision making models e.g. information processing, cognitive continuum theory, recognition-primed decision making, Tanner’s model of clinical judgment in nursing, using one’s experience/intuition in CJDM, organisational/environmental factors that influence CJDM (e.g. authority, autonomy, role of student nurses in CJDM, uncertainty in judgment and decision making), decision-making
frameworks, e.g. code of conduct, NMBI decision-making framework, AI / computer-aided decision-making, assessment scores and scales, wearable technologies, team-based decision-making, consensus-driven decision-making.

REMEMBER: YOU are the subject of this analysis, NOT the patient nor other third parties.

The analysis is about YOUR clinical judgments and decision-making. The patient/service-user and/or others are how your judgments and decision-making will be explored within this analysis.

The anonymity of all involved is to be preserved.

You may write in 1st person, as in ‘I would use a decision-making aid to assess the patient’ rather than ‘the author would use a decision-making aid to assess the patient’.

Total word limit: approximately 2500 words (word count for patient scenario, think-aloud, and reference list may vary)

Word limit for analysis: within the assignment, the analysis section has to take up the largest proportion, i.e approximately 1000 words. Suggested structure for approx. 2500 word assignment (with approx. word limits for sections):

• Introduction (approx. 150 words)
• Patient scenario (N/A)
• Think aloud protocol/answers (your judgments and decisions for the patient scenario) (N/A)
• Choice of one to max-3 clinical judgment and decision making topic/s from your think-aloud protocol (N/A, but no more than a sentence or two)
• Theoretical background to the 1-3 topics chosen for analysis (approx. 500 words) Analysis of think-aloud protocol concerning relevant research literature throughout (approx.. 1000 words)
• Conclusion (approx. 150 words) o Include relevance to own future practice, i.e. next practice placement
• References (N/A)