ArticleJournal of graduate medical education2018
A Comparison of Assessment Tools: Is Direct Observation an Improvement Over Objective Structured Clinical Examinations for Communications Skills Evaluation?
Article in Journal of graduate medical education, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Are evaluations in simulated medical encounters reliable among rater types? A comparison between standardized patient and outside observer ratings of OSCEs.PEC innovation · 2023Article
- It does not have to be either or! Assessing competence in medicine should be a continuum between an analytic and a holistic approach.Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice · 2021Article
- The Enhanced Brief Structured Observation Model: Efficiently Assess Trainee Competence and Provide Feedback.MedEdPORTAL : the journal of teaching and learning resources · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEvaluation of resident physicians' communications skills is a challenging task and is increasingly accomplished with standardized examinations. There exists a need to identify the effective, efficient methods for assessment of communications skills.
objectiveWe compared objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) and direct observation as approaches for assessing resident communications skills.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of orthopaedic surgery resident physicians at a single tertiary care academic institution, using the Institute for Healthcare Communication "4 Es" model for effective communication. Data were collected between 2011 and 2015. A total of 28 residents, each with OSCE and complete direct observation assessment checklists, were included in the analysis. Residents were included if they had 1 OSCE assessment and 2 or more complete direct observation assessments.
resultsThere were 28 of a possible 59 residents (47%) included. A total of 89% (25 of 28) of residents passed the communications skills OSCE; only 54% (15 of 28) of residents passed the direct observation communications assessment. There was a positive, moderate correlation between OSCE and direct observation scores overall (
conclusionsOur results suggest that OSCE and direct observation tools provide different insights into resident communications skills (simulation of rare and challenging situations versus real-life daily encounters), and may provide useful perspectives on resident communications skills in different contexts.
Indexed as
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.