Supporting medical decision making with argumentation tools

This study investigated the collaborative decision-making and communicative discourse of groups of learners engaged in a simulated medical emergency in two conditions. In one condition subgroups used a traditional whiteboard (TW group) to document medical arguments on how to solve a medical emergency. In the other condition subgroups used interactive whiteboards (IW group) where they could document their medical arguments by using a structured template for constructing, annotating and sharing arguments. The discourse of each group was coded with respect to decision-making and communicative activities. The research goal was to identify relationships between the decision-making and collaborative discourse under the two conditions. The IW condition differed from the TW condition in that participants engaged in more adaptive decision-making behavior early on in the intervention. This early engagement led to shared understandings and subsequently to more effective patient management. Group differences were also found in the types of collaborative discourse and the IW groups produced more productive argumentation.