ArticleCureus2025
The Reliability of a Modified Kalamazoo Consensus Statement Checklist for Assessing the Communication Skills of Anesthesia Doctors in the Simulated Environment.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A pilot study on factors linked to healthcare providers' communication with older adults.Dementia & neuropsychologia · 2026Article
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
Background Clear communication is vital in anesthesiology to ensure patient safety and deliver high-quality care. Communication errors remain a significant cause of medical errors worldwide. The Modified Kalamazoo Consensus Statement Checklist (MKCSC) offers a structured approach to assessing communication skills. This study evaluates the reliability, validity, and applicability of the MKCSC in India's diverse, multidisciplinary healthcare setting, focusing on its impact on improving communication and patient care through the Program for the Approach to Complex Encounters (PACE). Aim This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of the MKCSC in evaluating and enhancing communication skills among physicians, resident doctors, and nurses and to examine the role of PACE in improving communication outcomes. Methods A repeated cross-sectional study was conducted at Dr. Rela Institute and Medical Center, Chennai, involving 200 participants, including doctors (≥2 years post-MD), resident doctors, and nurses. Participants underwent pre-intervention simulations assessed using the MKCSC, followed by PACE training. Communication scores were evaluated at one-month and five-month follow-ups using paired t-tests, intra-class correlation coefficients (ICCs) for interrater reliability, and Cronbach's alpha for internal consistency. Results The MKCSC demonstrated excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha: 0.89-0.91) and interrater reliability (ICC: 0.85-0.88). Communication scores improved significantly from 23.5 ± 1.4 pre-intervention to 28.9 ± 2.1 at one month and 30.5 ± 2.2 at five months (p < 0.001). Improvements were consistent across professional groups, with significant gains in building relationships and understanding perspectives. Conclusion The MKCSC is a reliable and adaptable tool for assessing communication skills. Combined with PACE, it fosters empathy, enhances teamwork, and bridges communication gaps, contributing to improved patient safety. Further research is needed to validate its use in real-world clinical settings and expand its impact on healthcare delivery.
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.