Keywords
DICL texnologiyasi
tahliliy fikrlash
klinik reasoning
patogenez
klinik holat
integrativ ta’lim
tibbiy ta’lim.
How to Cite
Abstract
Mazkur maqolada patologik fiziologiya fanini o‘qitishda DICL — Diversity, Integration and Clinical Learning texnologiyasi asosida talabalarning tahliliy fikrlash, klinik mulohaza yuritish va patofiziologik jarayonlarni mexanistik tahlil qilish ko‘nikmalarini rivojlantirish samaradorligi o‘rganildi. Tadqiqotda 148 nafar talaba ishtirok etdi. Ular nazorat guruhi va tajriba guruhiga ajratildi. Nazorat guruhida mashg‘ulotlar an’anaviy usulda, tajriba guruhida esa klinik holatlar, patogenetik zanjir tuzish, laborator ko‘rsatkichlarni tahlil qilish va refleksiv muhokama asosida tashkil etildi. Tadqiqot natijalari tajriba guruhida tahliliy fikrlash ko‘nikmalari, klinik keyslarni yechish sifati va patogenetik bog‘lanishlarni izohlash ko‘rsatkichlari nazorat guruhiga nisbatan sezilarli darajada yuqori bo‘lganini ko‘rsatdi. Yakuniy baholashda tajriba guruhida o‘rtacha ball 84,6±7,8 ni, nazorat guruhida esa 72,3±8,5 ni tashkil etdi. Guruhlar o‘rtasidagi farq statistik jihatdan ishonchli bo‘ldi (p<0,001). Olingan natijalar DICL texnologiyasi patologik fiziologiya fanini o‘qitishda talabalarning tahliliy va klinik tafakkurini rivojlantirishda samarali pedagogik yondashuv ekanligini ko‘rsatadi.References
1. Cooper N., Bartlett M., Gay S., Hammond A., Lillicrap M., Matthan J., Singh M. Consensus statement on the content of clinical reasoning curricula in undergraduate medical education // Medical Teacher. – 2021. – Vol. 43, No. 2. – P. 152–159.
2. Hu B., Wang L., Wu J., Zhu L., Chen Z. A combination of case-based learning with flipped classroom improved performance of medical students in nephrology bedside teaching // BMC Medical Education. – 2024. – Vol. 24, No. 1. – P. 995–1001.
3. Norman G. Clinical reasoning in medicine // Academic Medicine. – 2015. – Vol. 80, No. 10. – P. 915–922.
4. Guyton A.C., Hall J.E. Textbook of Medical Physiology. – Philadelphia: Elsevier Saunders, 2016. – 1146 p.
5. Litvitskiy P.F. Patofiziologiya. – Moskva: GEOTAR-Media, 2015. – 832 b.
6. Eva K.W. What every teacher needs to know about clinical reasoning // Medical Education. – 2025. – Vol. 39, No. 1. – P. 98–106.
7. Turg‘unov B.Y. Diagnostik ko‘nikmalar va keys metodika. – Toshkent: Fan va taraqqiyot, 2023. – 183 b.
8. Redmond C., Loughran H., Walsh C., Dolan E., Bennett D. Development and validation of a script concordance test to assess clinical reasoning in osteopathy // BMC Medical Education. – 2022. – Vol. 22, No. 1. – P. 806–813.
9. Woods N.N., Brooks L.R., Norman G.R. The value of basic science in clinical diagnosis: creating coherence among signs and symptoms // Medical Education. – 2005. – Vol. 39, No. 1. – P. 107–112.
10. Xu Y., Shao Y., Dong J., Shi S., Jiang C., Li Q. Advancing problem-based learning with clinical reasoning // Medical Education Research. – 2025. – Vol. 18. – P. 45–59.
11. Bickley L.S. Bates’ Guide to Physical Examination and History Taking. – Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer, 2021. – 1024 p.
12. Durning S.J. Understanding Clinical Reasoning in Health Professions Education. – Singapore: World Scientific, 2023. – 312 p.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2026 To'lqin Zokirovich Xamroqulov, Diyorbek Zafarjon o'g'li Zokirjonov (Author)