Search

Context: Gender is increasingly regarded as an important factor in doctor-patient communication education. This review aims to assess if and how gender is addressed by current assessment instruments for communication skills in medical education., Methods: In 2009 at Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, an online search was conducted in the bibliographic databases PubMed, PsycINFO and ERIC for references about communication skills assessment instruments designed to be completed by trained faculty staff and used in medical education. The search strategy used the following search terms: 'consultation skills'; 'doctor-patient communication'; 'physician-patient relations'; 'medical education'; 'instruments'; 'measurement', and 'assessment'. Papers published between January 1999 and June 2009 were included. The assessment instruments identified were analysed for gender-specific content., Results: The search yielded 21 communication skills assessment instruments. Only two of the 17 checklists obtained explicitly considered gender as a communication-related issue. Only six of 21 manuals considered gender in any way and none gave specific details to explain which aspects of communication behaviour should be assessed with regard to gender., Conclusions: Very few communication assessment instruments in medical education focus on gender. Nevertheless, interest exists in using gender in communication skills assessment. The criteria for and purpose of assessing gender in communication skills in medical education are yet to be clarified., (© Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2011.)

Context: The move towards competence-based medical education has created a need for instruments that support and assess competence development. Portfolios seem suitable but mixed reports of their success are emerging., Methods: To examine the effectiveness of portfolios, we searched PubMed and EMBASE using the keyword 'portfol*', PsychInfo and ERIC using the keywords 'portfol*' and 'medical education' and references of retrieved papers for empirical studies on portfolios in all phases of medical education. Thirty of 1939 retrieved papers met the inclusion criteria and were analysed. Data were collated against the research question, number of subjects, design, setting, findings and limitations, purpose and content, mentoring and assessment. We analysed impact using a modified version of Kirkpatrick's hierarchy., Results: Because differences across studies precluded statistical meta-analysis, the data were analysed by context, goals and procedure. Positive effects were strongest in undergraduate education. Important factors for success were: clearly communicated goals and procedures; integration with curriculum and assessment; flexible structure; support through mentoring, and measures to heighten feasibility and reduce required time. Moderately good inter-rater reliability was reported and global criteria and discussions among raters were beneficial. Formative and summative assessment could be combined. Without assessment, portfolios were vulnerable to competition from other summative assessment instruments., Conclusions: For portfolios to be effective in supporting and assessing competence development, robust integration into the curriculum and tutor support are essential. Further studies should focus on the effectiveness and user-friendliness of portfolios, the merits of holistic assessment procedures, and the competences of an effective portfolio mentor.

The traditional clinical examination has been shown to have serious limitations in terms of its validity and reliability. The OSCE provides some answers to these limitations and has become very popular. Many variants on the original OSCE format now exist and much research has been done on various aspects of their use. Issues to be addressed relate to organization matters and to the quality of the assessment. This paper focuses particularly on the latter with respect to ways of ensuring content validity and achieving acceptable levels of reliability. A particular concern has been the demonstrable need for long examinations if high levels of reliability are to be achieved. Strategies for reducing the practical difficulties this raises are discussed. Standard setting methods for use with OSCEs are described.

This paper reports a study which compared the performance of different groups of students and doctors on identical and equivalent tests set in an objective-type format and in a free-response format. The tests were designed to ensure that the content was relevant to clinical practice at the hospital intern level. In all test situations candidates' scores were significantly higher in the objective tests than in the free-response tests. This difference was greater for the more junior and less competent students than for the more competent doctors. The cueing effect of the options was thought to be the main factor responsible for the difference in performance. The results of a questionnaire survey demonstrated that students were aware of the deficiencies in multiple-choice tests. A large majority of the students believed that the free-response tests gave a more accurate assessment of their clinical ability. It was found that in these tests, aimed at measuring aspects of clinical competence, multiple-choice questions appeared to overestimate the candidate's ability to an extent that made them less suitable than free-response questions for this purpose. It was also found that free-response tests, of the type used in this study, provide a suitable alternative to multiple-choice tests for use in the written section of clinical examinations. It was concluded that the written component of the final examination in the medical course should have a preponderance of free-response items over multiple-choice items.