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

Autor/inn/en	Boulet, John R.; van Zanten, Marta; de Champlain, Andre; Hawkins, Richard E.; Peitzman, Steven J.
Titel	Checklist Content on a Standardized Patient Assessment: An Ex Post Facto Review
Quelle	In: Advances in Health Sciences Education, 13 (2008) 1, S.59-69 (11 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	1382-4996
DOI	10.1007/s10459-006-9024-4
Schlagwörter	Check Lists; Foreign Medical Graduates; Patients; Clinical Experience; Simulation; Item Analysis; Interrater Reliability; Standardized Tests; Clinical Diagnosis; Diagnostic Tests; Program Improvement; Evaluation Research + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Checkliste; Patient; Simulation program; Simulationsprogramm; Itemanalyse; Interrater-Reliabilität; Standadised tests; Standardisierter Test; Diagnostic test; Diagnostischer Test; Evaluationsforschung
Abstract	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. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	Springer. 233 Spring Street, New York, NY 10013. Tel: 800-777-4643; Tel: 212-460-1500; Fax: 212-348-4505; e-mail: service-ny@springer.com; Web site: http://www.springerlink.com
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2017/4/10