Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40716949›Full record

ArticleThe clinical teacher2025

Patient Perspectives in Optometry Clinical Exams.

Amy Lim, Monica Moran, Khyber Alam

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The clinical teacher, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Amy LimDepartment of Optometry and Vision Science, School of Health and Clinical Sciences, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-2923-3276
Monica MoranWestern Australian Centre for Rural Health (WACRH), The University of Western Australia, Geraldton, Western Australia, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0353-6244
Khyber AlamDepartment of Optometry and Vision Science, School of Health and Clinical Sciences, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-7779-0467

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEffective assessment of patient-centred care (PCC) is integral to clinical communication training. This study investigates the relationship between Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) scores and simulated patient (SP) questionnaire responses of 58 Optometry students. The analysis aims to identify specific aspects of PCC that correlate with examiner-assessed high performance, as well as highlight discrepancies between SP and examiner evaluations. APPROACH: Analysis of the SP questionnaires and OSCE performance scores from communication-focused OSCE stations was conducted. The data were analysed using Spearman's rank correlations to assess associations between SP-rated elements such as ability to trust student practitioner, opportunities to ask questions, feeling concerns were addressed, willingness to return, willingness to refer to friend and/or family and OSCE scores. EVALUATION: Trust, willingness to return and referral likelihood demonstrated strong positive correlations with OSCE performance, with willingness to return and referral likelihood demonstrating the strongest correlations. However, specific subdomains, such as the ability to ask questions, showed variability in importance to SPs across station types, being more relevant in counselling than in case history. IMPLICATIONS: The findings suggest that global assessments may better capture patient perceptions of students' communication competence than microskills, such as the student's ability to invite questions, which vary in relevance across contexts. Aligning clinical training and evaluation frameworks with SP priorities, including addressing patient concerns and fostering trust, can enhance both patient satisfaction and the validity of PCC assessments.

Indexed as

Educational MeasurementOptometryAdultClinical CompetenceCommunicationFemaleHumansMalePatient-Centered CarePatient SatisfactionPatient SimulationSurveys and QuestionnairesassessmentoptometryOSCEpatient‐centred care

Identifiers

PMID40716949
PMCPMC12301089

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.