Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Articles
    • Current
    • Early Release
    • Archive
    • Rufus A. Lyman Award
    • Theme Issues
    • Special Collections
  • Authors
    • Author Instructions
    • Submission Process
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Call for Papers - Intersectionality of Pharmacists’ Professional and Personal Identity
  • Reviewers
    • Reviewer Instructions
    • Call for Mentees
    • Reviewer Recognition
    • Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
  • About
    • About AJPE
    • Editorial Team
    • Editorial Board
    • History
  • More
    • Meet the Editors
    • Webinars
    • Contact AJPE
  • Other Publications

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education
  • Other Publications
American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education

Advanced Search

  • Articles
    • Current
    • Early Release
    • Archive
    • Rufus A. Lyman Award
    • Theme Issues
    • Special Collections
  • Authors
    • Author Instructions
    • Submission Process
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Call for Papers - Intersectionality of Pharmacists’ Professional and Personal Identity
  • Reviewers
    • Reviewer Instructions
    • Call for Mentees
    • Reviewer Recognition
    • Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
  • About
    • About AJPE
    • Editorial Team
    • Editorial Board
    • History
  • More
    • Meet the Editors
    • Webinars
    • Contact AJPE
  • Follow AJPE on Twitter
  • LinkedIn
Research ArticleQUALITATIVE RESEARCH ARTICLE

Cognitive and Metacognitive Processes Demonstrated by the Pharmacy Students When Making Therapeutic Decisions

Steven Walker, To Nhu Pham, Quang Hung Duong, Tina P. Brock and Kayley M. Lyons
American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education March 2022, 8817; DOI: https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe8817
Steven Walker
aMonash University, Faculty of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Parkville, VIC, Australia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
To Nhu Pham
aMonash University, Faculty of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Parkville, VIC, Australia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Quang Hung Duong
aMonash University, Faculty of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Parkville, VIC, Australia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Tina P. Brock
aMonash University, Faculty of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Parkville, VIC, Australia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Kayley M. Lyons
bUniversity of Melbourne, Centre for Digital Transformation of Health, Parkville, VIC, Australia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Objective. To characterize the types of cognitive and metacognitive processes demonstrated by third-year pharmacy students during a therapeutic reasoning activity.

Methods. A qualitative, descriptive study following a think-aloud protocol was used to analyze the cognitive (analytical) and metacognitive processes observed by third-year pharmacy students as they completed a 25-minute therapeutic reasoning activity. Using a deductive codebook developed from literature about reasoning, two independent coders characterized processes from audio-recorded, transcribed student think-aloud episodes while making therapeutic decisions about simulated clinical cases.

Results. A total of 40 think-aloud episodes were transcribed amongst the cohort. Categorization of the think-aloud transcriptions revealed a series of cognitive analytical and metacognitive processes demonstrated by students during the therapeutic decision-making activity. A total of 1,792 codes were categorized as analytical processes, falling into six major themes: 69% gathering information (1,232/1,792), 13% processing information (227/1,792), 7% making assessments (133/1,792), 1% synthesizing information (19/1,792), 7% articulating evidence (117/1,792) and 4% making a recommendation (64/1,792). In comparison to gathering information, a much lower frequency of processing and assessment was observed by students, particularly for those that were unable to resolve the case. Students’ movement between major analytical processes co-occurred commonly with metacognitive processes. Of the 918 codes categorized as metacognitive processes the two major themes were: 28% monitoring for knowledge or emotions (257/918) and 72% controlling the planning of next steps or verification of correct information (661/918). Sequencing the codes and co-occurrences of processes allowed us to propose an integrated cognitive/metacognitive model of therapeutic reasoning for students.

Conclusion. This study categorizes the cognitive (analytical) and metacognitive processes engaged during pharmacy students’ therapeutic reasoning process. The findings can inform current instructional practices and further research into educational activities that can strengthen pharmacy student therapeutic reasoning skills.

Keywords
  • clinical reasoning
  • therapeutic reasoning
  • metacognition
  • think-aloud
  • Received July 21, 2021.
  • Accepted March 7, 2022.
  • © 2022 American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education
Vol. 86, Issue 5
1 Jun 2022
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Download PDF
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Cognitive and Metacognitive Processes Demonstrated by the Pharmacy Students When Making Therapeutic Decisions
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
7 + 4 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
Cognitive and Metacognitive Processes Demonstrated by the Pharmacy Students When Making Therapeutic Decisions
Steven Walker, To Nhu Pham, Quang Hung Duong, Tina P. Brock, Kayley M. Lyons
American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education Mar 2022, 8817; DOI: 10.5688/ajpe8817

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Cognitive and Metacognitive Processes Demonstrated by the Pharmacy Students When Making Therapeutic Decisions
Steven Walker, To Nhu Pham, Quang Hung Duong, Tina P. Brock, Kayley M. Lyons
American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education Mar 2022, 8817; DOI: 10.5688/ajpe8817
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Similar AJPE Articles

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Lessons from Using Design Thinking to Develop the 2021 AACP Teacher’s Seminar
  • A Mixed-Methods Exploration of the Effect of Disabling Backward Navigation on Calculations Computerized Exams
Show more QUALITATIVE RESEARCH ARTICLE

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Keywords

  • clinical reasoning
  • therapeutic reasoning
  • metacognition
  • think-aloud

Home

  • AACP
  • AJPE

Articles

  • Current Issue
  • Early Release
  • Archive

Instructions

  • Author Instructions
  • Submission Process
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Reviewer Instructions

About

  • AJPE
  • Editorial Team
  • Editorial Board
  • History
  • Contact

© 2022 American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education

Powered by HighWire