Observational studyMedical education2019
Comparing resident-patient encounters and case presentations in a family medicine clinic.
Observational study in Medical education, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Resident and Attending Physician Perspectives on Indirect Observation in Competency-Based Medical Education.Journal of graduate medical education · 2025Article
- Perceptions of medical students and their facilitators on clinical communication skills teaching, learning, and assessment.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Impact of Medical Scribe Experiences on Subsequent Medical Student Learning.Medical science educator · 2021Article
- Codebook for rating clinical communication skills based on the Calgary-Cambridge Guide.BMC medical education · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesOral case presentations following resident-patient interactions provide the primary mechanism by which faculty supervisors assess resident competence. However, the extent to which these presentations capture the content and quality of resident-patient communication during the encounter remains unknown. We aimed to determine whether: (i) the resident-patient encounter content matched information conveyed in the case presentation; (ii) the quality of resident-patient communication was accurately conveyed, and (iii) supervisors addressed effective and ineffective communication processes.
methodsA total of 22 pairs of resident-patient encounters and family medicine resident case presentations were video- or audiorecorded, transcribed and compared for content. Resident-patient communication was assessed using adapted versions of the Calgary-Cambridge Guide to the Medical Interview and Explanation and Planning Scale.
resultsInterviews and presentations contained largely congruent content, but social history and the patient's perspective were consistently excluded from case presentations. Although six of 19 specific communication skills were used in over 80% of resident encounters, the effective use of communication skills was widely variable. In most presentations, the quality of resident-patient communication was not explicitly conveyed to the supervisor. Although resident presentations provided 'cues' about communication issues, supervisors rarely responded.
conclusionsThis study lends support to direct observation in workplace-based learning of communication skills. When content areas such as the patient's perspective and education are excluded, supervisors cannot address them. In addition, presentations provided minimal insight about the quality of resident-patient encounters and limited the ability to address communication skills. These skills could be enhanced by attending to communication cues during case presentations, making increased use of direct observation and feedback, and promoting faculty development to address these missed teaching opportunities.
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.