...
首页> 外文期刊>Advances in Health Sciences Education >Checklist Content on a Standardized Patient Assessment: An Ex Post Facto Review
【24h】

Checklist Content on a Standardized Patient Assessment: An Ex Post Facto Review

机译:标准化患者评估的清单内容:事后审查

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

While checklists are often used to score standardized patient based clinical assessments, little research has focused on issues related to their development or the level of agreement with respect to the importance of specific items. Five physicians independently reviewed checklists from 11 simulation scenarios that were part of the former Educational Commission for Foreign Medical Graduate’s Clinical Skills Assessment and classified the clinical appropriateness of each of the checklist items. Approximately 78% of the original checklist items were judged to be needed, or indicated, given the presenting complaint and the purpose of the assessment. Rater agreement was relatively poor with pairwise associations (Kappa coefficient) ranging from 0.09 to 0.29. However, when only consensus indicated items were included, there was little change in examinee scores, including their reliability over encounters. Although most checklist items in this sample were judged to be appropriate, some could potentially be eliminated, thereby minimizing the scoring burden placed on the standardized patients. Periodic review of checklist items, concentrating on their clinical importance, is warranted.
机译:尽管清单通常用于对标准化的基于患者的临床评估进行评分,但很少有研究集中在与他们的发展或就特定项目的重要性达成的协议水平有关的问题。五名医师分别从11个模拟方案中独立检查了清单,这些方案是前外国医学研究生教育委员会临床技能评估的一部分,并对每个清单项目的临床适用性进行了分类。根据提出的投诉和评估的目的,大约78%的原始检查表项目被判断为需要或表明。评分者一致性相对较差,成对关联(Kappa系数)介于0.09至0.29之间。但是,当只包括共识项目时,考生分数(包括其在遭遇中的信度)变化不大。尽管该样本中的大多数检查表项目都被认为是适当的,但某些检查表项目可能会被消除,从而最大程度地减少了标准化患者的评分负担。必须定期检查清单项目,重点是其临床重要性。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号