CLIPP updates for 2011/12

Annual case updates underway

CLIPP Case editors are busy conducting the annual review of their cases to make sure medical content is up-to-date, accurate and , meets the curricular learning objectives for that case. In addition, case editors are working with the CLIPP Editorial Board to revise the case learning objectives to ensure clear and consistent wording across cases. We hope this will be especially helpful to clerkship directors as you plan your curriculum. Please note that whenever content changes are made to the case, the resources associated with that case (case summary/KTPs, Final Exam Questions, and Questions for Further Consideration) are subsequently reviewed and revised as needed.

We would like to thank CLIPP case editors and associate editors for their hard work to ensure both accuracy of case content and implementation of effective pedagogical practices.

Important changes to take place as of July 1

Please note the following changes that will be implemented on or before July 1.

CLIPP Case 24: The case of Matthew, a 2 year-old boy with altered mental status, has been extensively revised and should be available July 1^st. The original case involved severe plumbism, whereas the revised case will focus on a broader view of toxic ingestions (including recognition of toxidromes and management of acute ingestions, curricular objectives that were not covered well previously within CLIPP). Lead screening is now covered in Case 3(3 year-old well child visit)

CLIPP Case 28: During the last week of June, Case 28 will be unavailable for a day as we implement substantial revisions. Although the learning objectives for this case about developmental delay will remain unchanged, the case editor and associate editor have implemented substantial improvements to the organization and flow of case content as well as important and comprehensive updates to developmental screening techniques.

Diagnostic Network Scoring:Cases with a diagnostic network include three important steps to help students hone their clinical reasoning skills. The student is first asked to identify key findings for the patient at the current point in time. Next, the student develops a differential diagnoses. Finally, the student rates the connection between each finding and each diagnosis using a five-point scale (“strongly speaks against” to “strongly speaks for”). In an effort to further hone the diagnostic reasoning process, we are modifying the networks across all CLIPP Cases where students will now be asked to rate the network connections using a three-point scale (does not speak for, neutral, speaks for). We hope this will provide even more clarity while reducing frustration and time spent working through the diagnostic networks.

New CLIPP Teaching Tool

In response to requests for additional teaching materials related to the CLIPP cases, we have created a series of questions that supplement and extend the teaching in CLIPP and we need your feedback!

Each CLIPP case now has additional questions (Questions for Further Consideration, or QFC’s) that target one or more of the following areas: basic science correlation, clinical correlation, clinical reasoning, management (includes diagnostic testing), ethics/professionalism, communication and/or biostatics.

These questions can be used in a variety of ways: topics for group discussion, student self-study, oral examination questions, supplemental clinical reasoning exercises, or for 4th year student curricula (to name a few). 

We encourage you to take a look at the QFC’s which have been published within the password-protected CLIPP Instructors’ Area at med-u.org. Please consider providing feedback about the QFC content and/or organization as we strive to make this a user-friendly and useful resource for the pediatric clerkship (email: qfc-feedback@med-u.org).