Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28603434›Full record

ArticleAdvances in medical education and practice2017

Investigating a self-scoring interview simulation for learning and assessment in the medical consultation.

Catherine Bruen, Clarence Kreiter, Vincent Wade, Teresa Pawlikowska

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Advances in medical education and practice, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Catherine BruenHealth Professions Education Centre, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.
Clarence KreiterDepartment of Family Medicine, Carver College of Medicine, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa, USA.
Vincent WadeSchool of Computer Science and Statistics, Faculty of Engineering, Mathematics and Science, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Teresa PawlikowskaHealth Professions Education Centre, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Experience with simulated patients supports undergraduate learning of medical consultation skills. Adaptive simulations are being introduced into this environment. The authors investigate whether it can underpin valid and reliable assessment by conducting a generalizability analysis using IT data analytics from the interaction of medical students (in psychiatry) with adaptive simulations to explore the feasibility of adaptive simulations for supporting automated learning and assessment. The generalizability (G) study was focused on two clinically relevant variables: clinical decision points and communication skills. While the G study on the communication skills score yielded low levels of true score variance, the results produced by the decision points, indicating clinical decision-making and confirming user knowledge of the process of the Calgary-Cambridge model of consultation, produced reliability levels similar to what might be expected with rater-based scoring. The findings indicate that adaptive simulations have potential as a teaching and assessment tool for medical consultations.

Indexed as

competency assessmentgeneraliz-ability theorymedical educationsimulation technology

Identifiers

PMID28603434
PMCPMC5457147

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.