Dataset Information

Assessing Communication Skills of Medical Students in Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCE)--A Systematic Review of Rating Scales.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Teaching and assessment of communication skills have become essential in medical education. The Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) has been found as an appropriate means to assess communication skills within medical education. Studies have demonstrated the importance of a valid assessment of medical students' communication skills. Yet, the validity of the performance scores depends fundamentally on the quality of the rating scales used in an OSCE. Thus, this systematic review aimed at providing an overview of existing rating scales, describing their underlying definition of communication skills, determining the methodological quality of psychometric studies and the quality of psychometric properties of the identified rating scales.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review to identify psychometrically tested rating scales, which have been applied in OSCE settings to assess communication skills of medical students. Our search strategy comprised three databases (EMBASE, PsycINFO, and PubMed), reference tracking and consultation of experts. We included studies that reported psychometric properties of communication skills assessment rating scales used in OSCEs by examiners only. The methodological quality of included studies was assessed using the COnsensus based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist. The quality of psychometric properties was evaluated using the quality criteria of Terwee and colleagues.

Results

Data of twelve studies reporting on eight rating scales on communication skills assessment in OSCEs were included. Five of eight rating scales were explicitly developed based on a specific definition of communication skills. The methodological quality of studies was mainly poor. The psychometric quality of the eight rating scales was mainly intermediate.

Discussion

Our results reveal that future psychometric evaluation studies focusing on improving the methodological quality are needed in order to yield psychometrically sound results of the OSCEs assessing communication skills. This is especially important given that most OSCE rating scales are used for summative assessment, and thus have an impact on medical students' academic success.

SUBMITTER: Comert M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4816391 | biostudies-literature | 2016

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Assessing Communication Skills of Medical Students in Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCE)--A Systematic Review of Rating Scales.

Cömert Musa M Zill Jördis Maria JM Christalle Eva E Dirmaier Jörg J Härter Martin M Scholl Isabelle I

PloS one 20160331 3

<h4>Background</h4>Teaching and assessment of communication skills have become essential in medical education. The Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) has been found as an appropriate means to assess communication skills within medical education. Studies have demonstrated the importance of a valid assessment of medical students' communication skills. Yet, the validity of the performance scores depends fundamentally on the quality of the rating scales used in an OSCE. Thus, this syst ...[more]

PMID: 27031506

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPhysicians' communication skills (CS) are known to significantly affect the quality of health care. Communication skills training programs are part of most undergraduate medical curricula and are usually assessed in Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCE) throughout the curriculum. The adoption of reliable measurement instruments is thus essential to evaluate such skills.MethodsUsing Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA), Multi-Group Confirmatory Factor Analysis (MGCFA) and Item Response Theory analysis (IRT) the current retrospective study tested the factorial validity and reliability of a four-item global rating scale developed by Hodges and McIlroy to measure CS among 296 third- and fourth-year medical students at the Faculty of Medicine in Geneva, Switzerland, during OSCEs.ResultsEFA results at each station showed good reliability scores. However, measurement invariance assessments through MGCFA across different stations (i.e., same students undergoing six or three stations) and across different groups of stations (i.e., different students undergoing groups of six or three stations) were not satisfactory, failing to meet the minimum requirements to establish measurement invariance and thus possibly affecting reliable comparisons between students' communication scores across stations. IRT revealed that the four communication items provided overlapping information focusing especially on high levels of the communication spectrum.ConclusionsUsing this four-item set in its current form it may be difficult to adequately differentiate between students who are poor in CS from those who perform better. Future directions in best-practices to assess CS among medical students in the context of OSCE may thus focus on (1) training examiners so to obtain scores that are more coherent across stations; and (2) evaluating items in terms of their ability to cover a wider spectrum of medical students' CS. In this respect, IRT can prove to be very useful for the continuous evaluation of CS measurement instruments in performance-based assessments.

Project description:ObjectivesThis study investigates the effectiveness of a virtual format of an advanced communication skills observed structured clinical examination (OSCE) for senior medical students in comparison to an in-person format. The study also examines the emotional support students experience in the virtual setting. Our analysis was based on quantitative data collected through objective checklists and post-OSCE survey results.MethodsThe virtual OSCE was a revision of an earlier in-person formative advanced communication skills OSCE for fourth-year medical students. Student performances were assessed by self and peers using objective checklists-the modified Master Interview Rating Scale (mMIRS) and Communication Behavior Checklist (CBC). The mMIRS measured interview process such as avoiding jargon and demonstrating empathy. The CBC examined interview content which included tasks specific to the content of the case. The OSCE was followed by a faculty-led debrief and quantitative survey. The virtual OSCE was conducted in 2021, and the results of the checklists and survey were compared with those collected from two earlier in-person OSCEs.ResultsEighty-three students participated in the virtual OSCE. There was no difference in mMIRS scores between the virtual and in-person OSCE. Overall CBC scores were lower in the virtual OSCE compared to in-person (p < 0.05). Sixty-seven out of 83 (80.7%) students completed the post-OSCE survey. There were no differences between the virtual and in-person OSCE in terms of educational value, whether the OSCE would change the way participants talk to patients, and preparedness to have serious conversations with patients. All respondents somewhat or strongly agreed with feeling emotionally supported during the virtual OSCE.ConclusionThe virtual format was a suitable alternative to an in-person, formative, advanced communication skills OSCE for medical students. The virtual OSCE was educationally effective and was met with student satisfaction and a sense of emotional support. Future virtual iterations must ensure adequate instruction on interview content.

Dataset Information

Assessing Communication Skills of Medical Students in Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCE)--A Systematic Review of Rating Scales.

Background

Methods

Results

Discussion

Publications

Assessing Communication Skills of Medical Students in Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCE)--A Systematic Review of Rating Scales.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets