Reflection

Clinical Correlations ended up being one of my favorite courses because it really changed how I think clinically. Instead of approaching cases the way I would for an exam, this course helped me start thinking more realistically about how patients actually present. Working in small groups with faculty from different specialties and rotating through different sections, such as pediatrics and surgery, made each section feel different and pushed me to adjust how I approached each case.

One of the biggest things I took away from this course was learning how important it is to keep a broad differential. Early on, I felt pressure to narrow down to one or two diagnoses quickly, but Clinical Correlations taught me that especially early in a presentation, there often isn’t a clear-cut answer. You don’t always have all the clues right away, and staying open-minded is necessary to avoid anchoring too early.

This course also reinforced how important labs and diagnostic studies are as tools. I learned that not fully understanding lab values can be dangerous, and that labs aren’t just numbers you memorize, but information that should actively guide your clinical thinking and management decisions.

Another area where I grew a lot was communication and teamwork. Practicing simulated patient encounters and mock presentations helped me get more comfortable thinking out loud and presenting my reasoning. In Clinical Correlations I, I was honestly nervous about saying the wrong thing and found it hard to speak up. Over time, I realized that if we don’t share our thoughts and work through them together, we don’t get anywhere. Some of the best learning came from bouncing ideas off my classmates and building off each other’s reasoning.

In Clinical Correlations I, I was more hesitant and less confident overall. From feeling shy speaking up, unsure about how to properly interpret labs, to uncertain about how to present a case clearly. I knew pieces of information but struggled to put them together in a meaningful way. Early cases felt overwhelming, especially when there was no obvious answer.

By Clinical Correlations II, that discomfort had noticeably improved. With more experience and stronger clinical tools, I felt more comfortable interpreting labs, presenting my thought process, and contributing to group discussions. The cases began to feel less intimidating and more like a puzzle game, I became more confident keeping a broad differential, thinking out loud, and adjusting my reasoning as new data became available.

Overall, Clinical Correlations helped bridge the gap between classroom learning and real patient care. It strengthened my ability to think broadly, work collaboratively, and approach patients with a more realistic and flexible clinical mindset.