Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33593345›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2021

Assessing communication skills during OSCE: need for integrated psychometric approaches.

Giovanni Piumatti, Bernard Cerutti, Noëlle Junod Perron

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Student Dietitians' Perceptions and Experiences of Objective Structured Clinical Examination to Assess Communication Skills.Journal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Implementation of Pediatric Allergic Rhinitis Module as a Part of AETCOM among First-Year Medical Undergraduates: Mixed Methods Evaluation.Indian journal of community medicine : official publication of Indian Association of Preventive & Social Medicine
    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

3 authors.

Giovanni PiumattiDivision of Primary Care, Population Epidemiology Unit, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland. giovanni.piumatti@hcuge.ch.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4241-1812
Bernard CeruttiFaculty of Medicine, Unit of Development and Research in Medical Education (UDREM), University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
Noëlle Junod PerronFaculty of Medicine, Unit of Development and Research in Medical Education (UDREM), University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

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.

Indexed as

Clinical CompetenceEducational MeasurementCommunicationHumansPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective StudiesSwitzerlandCommunication assessmentItem response theoryMeasurement invarianceOSCE

Identifiers

PMID33593345
PMCPMC7887794

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.