Utilização de mapas conceituais como ferramenta de ensino para o desenvolvimento do raciocínio clínico no curso de medicina da Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte

BACKGROUND: Among the wide range of skills displayed by a medical doctor is undoubtedly the need to use cohesive and well grounded clinical reasoning in order for medical care to be indeed effective. It is in this respect that conceptual maps emerge; these are a methodological innovation that allows a comprehensive, panoramic and associative outlook of theoretical content, making it more practical and applicable to the reality of clinical observation. Promoting learning, learning resources and a feedback system between professor and students, as well as assessing and monitoring the performance of students during their academic training, are the main features of this tool. OBJETIVE: Assess the use of conceptual maps as a teaching-learning tool in the training of undergraduate medical students at Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN). METHODOLOGY: Interventional, randomized, cross-sectional study conducted with students from the 3rd and 5th periods of the medical course at UFRN, during the second semester of 2014, totaling 86 participants, divided into two groups: GI (intervention – clinical case resolution with a conceptual map) and GII (control – clinical case resolution without a conceptual map) in each period. RESULTS: The use of conceptual maps to teach liver failure syndrome resulted in a statistically significant cognitive gain for G1 students from the 5th period (GI: 6.8±1.6 and 8.0±1.5, p = 0.024; GII: 7.2±2.1 and 8.0±1.7, p = 0.125, pre and post-intermediate means, respectively), a result not observed in the period 3rd (GI: 7.7±1.3 and 8.0±1.4, p = 0.501; GII: 6.7±1.8 and 7.8±1.8; p=0.068, pre and post-intermediate means, respectively). Students in the 3 rd period gave better responses to the first clinical case, with a larger number of suitable concepts and crosslinks, when they used conceptual maps (GI: 91.3±13.15 and GII: 64.84±22.84, p=0,002). Students in the 5th period exhibited better clinical reasoning and more complete responses using the tool (p=0,01). Most of the students were not ...