ArticlePloS one2025
Online assessment of medical students' communication competence in patient encounters: Validation of the VA-MeCo situational judgement test.
Article in PloS one, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMedical communication is a core task of physicians, and its quality affects both patients and physicians. Hence, the teaching and measurement of medical communication competence (MCC) are crucial during medical studies. This study aims to explore the factorial and construct validity of the Video-Based Assessment of Medical Communication Competence (VA-MeCo), an online-situational judgement test (SJT) designed to measure three aspects of medical students' communication competence in patient encounters: advancing content, providing structure, and building relationship.
methodsWe conducted an online survey with N = 395 medical students. Factorial validity was tested by confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). To investigate convergent and discriminant aspects of construct validity, we tested correlations of participants' VA-MeCo sub-test scores with scores in relevant cognitive variables, patient-interaction, and general personality traits.
resultsThe CFA confirmed the expected three-dimensional factorial structure showing good model fit and highly correlated dimensions. A McDonald's Ω of.94 for the complete test and >.81 for the sub-scales indicated high reliability. Regarding construct validity, the directions of the correlations were in line with the theoretically assumed associations; correlation sizes partly deviated from our expectations.
conclusionsThe results support that MCC can be validly measured using the VA-MeCo. The CFA results align with theory and previous studies that proposed three distinguishable dimensions of MCC. The findings on convergent and discriminant validity demonstrate that the test measures MCC as a specific construct that is positively related to patient-interaction; moreover, it can be distinguished from related but more generic constructs (e.g., social competence) and is not overly confounded with construct-irrelevant traits (e.g., intelligence). Notwithstanding the need for further validation, the results indicate that the VA-MeCo is a useful test for assessing MCC in medical education.
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.