Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40346504›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2025

A novel multi-measure approach to study medical students' communication performance and predictors of their communication quality - a cross-sectional study.

Giulia Zerbini, Pia Schneider, Miriam Reicherts, Nina Roob, Kathrin Jung-Can, Miriam Kunz, Philipp Reicherts

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2025. 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

7 authors.

Giulia ZerbiniDepartment of Medical Psychology and Sociology, Institute of Theoretical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Augsburg, Stenglinstrasse 2, 86156, Augsburg, Germany.
Pia SchneiderDepartment of Medical Psychology and Sociology, Institute of Theoretical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Augsburg, Stenglinstrasse 2, 86156, Augsburg, Germany.
Miriam ReichertsDepartment of Medical Psychology and Sociology, Institute of Theoretical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Augsburg, Stenglinstrasse 2, 86156, Augsburg, Germany.
Nina RoobDepartment of Medical Education Sciences (DEMEDA), Faculty of Medicine, University of Augsburg, Stenglinstrasse 2, 86156, Augsburg, Germany.
Kathrin Jung-CanDepartment of Medical Education Sciences (DEMEDA), Faculty of Medicine, University of Augsburg, Stenglinstrasse 2, 86156, Augsburg, Germany.
Miriam KunzDepartment of Medical Psychology and Sociology, Institute of Theoretical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Augsburg, Stenglinstrasse 2, 86156, Augsburg, Germany. miriam.kunz@med.uni-augsburg.de.
Philipp ReichertsDepartment of Medical Psychology and Sociology, Institute of Theoretical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Augsburg, Stenglinstrasse 2, 86156, Augsburg, Germany. philipp.reicherts@med.uni-augsburg.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSuccessful doctor-patient communication is a critical component of effective medical treatment and therefore plays a crucial role already in medical training. The aim of this cross-sectional study was to employ a multi-measure approach assessing different perspectives and variables to investigate how medical students' communication performance differs across medical training (1st vs. 5th or 7th semester).

methods43 medical students (1st semester: N = 23; 5th or 7th semester: N = 20) engaged in a simulated doctor-patient consultation with a standardized patient (SP) while being videorecorded. Medical students' communication quality was assessed by a communication expert and by the SP (both being blinded regarding the semester of the medical student) using standardized questionnaires (Berliner Global Rating Scale, Medical Interview Satisfaction Scale). Following our multi-measure approach, we also assessed several non-verbal parameters and variables (back-channeling, turn-taking, verbal dominance, automatic analysis of emotional facial expressions, skin conductance level).

resultsAnalysis of non-verbal measures demonstrates that advanced students used more back-channeling, displayed more facial expressions of happiness and showed elevated skin conductance levels compared to 1st semester students. These non-verbal parameters could significantly predict the expert's communication quality assessment, explaining 31% of the variance in communication quality. As expected, the expert and SP rated the communication quality of 5th /7th semester students as significantly better compared to 1st semester students.

conclusionsWe found that non-verbal parameters significantly differed between students of early vs. later stages of their medical training and were predictive of communication quality. Especially, sympathetic responsiveness - likely indicating the level of involvement - correlated with expert evaluations. These findings suggest that effective communication becomes evident across different channels and that sincere engagement into a conversation might be a requisite for successful doctor-patient communication.

Indexed as

Clinical CompetenceCommunicationPhysician-Patient RelationsStudents, MedicalAdultCross-Sectional StudiesEducation, Medical, UndergraduateFemaleHumansMalePatient SimulationSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung AdultDoctor-patient communicationNon-verbal behaviorStandardized patient

Identifiers

PMID40346504
PMCPMC12065382

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.