ArticlePerspectives on medical education2026
A Behaviourally Anchored Checklist for Mental Health Occupational Therapy Intake Interviews: Development and Reliability in a Single-Station Standardised Patient Encounter.
Article in Perspectives on medical education, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Introduction: Intake interview performance is a core competency in mental health occupational therapy education, but structured and reliable assessment tools for brief observed encounters remain limited. This cross-sectional study therefore developed a 16-item behaviourally anchored checklist/rubric for intake interviews and examined scoring reliability in a single OSCE-format standardised-patient station. Methods: Sixty third-year occupational therapy students from two Japanese universities completed one station using one of three standardised-patient scenarios. Two licensed occupational therapists independently rated performance across three domains (attitude, interview skills, evaluation). Internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach's alpha, inter-rater agreement using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs; absolute-agreement definition), and Bland-Altman analysis was used to quantify rater agreement and assess fixed or proportional bias in total scores. Results: Scenario-specific inter-rater agreement for the total score ranged from 0.761 to 0.929 across the three scenarios. Domain-level ICCs ranged from 0.584 to 0.892 for attitude, 0.510 to 0.825 for interview skills, and 0.794 to 0.979 for evaluation. Pooled descriptive summaries showed high internal consistency for all domains (Cronbach's α = 0.850-0.887) and for total scores (α = 0.816-0.817). Bland-Altman analysis showed a small mean difference between raters (0.18) and 95% limits of agreement from -2.35 to 2.71. Discussion: This behaviourally anchored checklist/rubric showed high internal consistency and acceptable inter-rater agreement for scoring intake interview performance in a single-station context. By operationalising interpersonal competencies as observable behaviours, the instrument may support rater calibration and structured formative feedback, including in settings where multi-station OSCE examinations are not feasible.
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.