ArticleJournal of graduate medical education2014
Feasibility and validation of real-time patient evaluations of internal medicine interns' communication and professionalism skills.
Article in Journal of graduate medical education, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Patients' Voices and the Assessment of Medical Trainees: A Discourse Analysis.Perspectives on medical education · 2026Review
- Article
- Real Patient Participation in Workplace-Based Assessment of Health Professional Trainees: A Scoping Review.Evaluation & the health professions · 2024Article
- A Unique Lens: Understanding What Nurses Are Best Positioned to Assess About Residents.Journal of graduate medical education · 2022Article
- Translating and validating a Japanese version of the instrument for patient assessment of medical professionalism (J-IPAMP): a cross-sectional survey.BMC medical education · 2022Article
- Assessing Interpersonal and Communication Skills.Journal of graduate medical education · 2021Article
- Using Multisource Feedback to Assess Resident Communication Skills: Adding a New Dimension to Milestone Data.Ochsner journal · 2020Article
- Standardized Patients to Assess Resident Interpersonal Communication Skills and Professional Values Milestones.The western journal of emergency medicine · 2018Article
- Eliciting the Impact of Digital Consulting for Young People Living With Long-Term Conditions (LYNC Study): Cognitive Interviews to Assess the Face and Content Validity of Two Patient-Reported Outcome Measures.Journal of medical Internet research · 2018Article
- How Residents Learn From Patient Feedback: A Multi-Institutional Qualitative Study of Pediatrics Residents' Perspectives.Journal of graduate medical education · 2018Article
- From structured, standardized assessment to unstructured assessment in the workplace.Journal of graduate medical education · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundResidents receive little information about how they interact with patients.
objectiveThis pilot study assessed the feasibility and validity of a new 16-item tool developed to assess patients' perspectives of interns' communication skills and professionalism and the team's communication.
methodsFeasibility was determined by the percentage of surveys completed, the average time for survey completion, the percentage of target interns evaluated, and the mean number of evaluations per intern. Generalizability was analyzed using an (evaluator:evaluatee) × item model. Simulated D studies estimated optimal numbers of items and evaluators. Factor analysis with varimax rotation was used to examine the structure of the items. Scores were correlated with other measures of communication and professionalism for validation.
resultsMost patients (225 of 305 [74%]) completed the evaluation. Each survey took approximately 6.3 minutes to complete. In 43 days over 18 weeks, 45 of 50 interns (90%) were evaluated an average of 4.6 times. Fifty evaluations would be required to reach a minimally acceptable coefficient (0.57). Two factor structures were identified. The evaluation did not correlate with faculty evaluations of resident communication but did correlate weakly (r = 0.140, P = .04) with standardized patient evaluations.
conclusionsA large number of patient evaluations are needed to reliably assess intern and team communication skills. Evaluations by patients add a perspective in assessing these skills that is different from those of faculty evaluations. Future work will focus on whether this new information adds to existing evaluation systems and warrants the added effort.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.