Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Assessing Medical Students’ Communication Skills by the Use of Standardized Patients: Emphasizing Standardized Patients’ Quality Assurance

  • Empirical Report
  • Published:
Academic Psychiatry Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

The objective structured examination is one of the most valid, reliable, and effective tools for assessing clinical and communication skills, often by use of standard patients (SPs). SPs can also be assessors of those skills. One of the crucial areas when utilizing SP-based assessment is the quality and consistency assurance of their portrayal of the case and their ability to fill in checklists in an adequate way. The aim of this study was to assess the validity and reliability of SPs’ ability to assess students’ communication skill via a Calgary-Cambridge checklist.

Method

This cross-sectional and correlational study was conducted at the Tehran University of Medical Science. We first analyzed validity; the criterion validity of the SPs’ filling in the checklists was assessed through determining the correlation between the SPs’ completed checklists and the checklists filled in by three physician raters individually and then reproducibility: it was assessed by a test-retest approach inter-rater reliability.

Result

The mean correlation for assessing the validity of SPs’ completed checklists by individual SPs was 0.81. The inter-rater reliability was calculated by kappa coefficient, and the total correlation among the three raters was 0.85. The reliability of the test-retest approach showed no significant differences between the test and re-test results.

Conclusion

The increased number of medical students and different faculties’ responsibilities such as doing educational, research, and health services duties assessing medical student communication skills is a complex issue. The results of our study showed that trained SPs can be used as a valid tool to assess medical students’ communication skills, which is also more cost effective and reduces work load of medical faculties.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Baig LA, Violato C, Crutcher RA. Assessing clinical communication skills in physicians: are the skills context specific or generalizable. BMC Med Educ. 2009;9:22.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Maguire P, Pitceathly C. Key communication skills and how to acquire them. Brit Med J. 2002;325:697–700.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Stubbe D. Effective patient centered—communication FOCUS. Winter. 2012;x(1):42–4.

    Google Scholar 

  4. World Health Organization. Doctor-patient interaction and communication. Geneva: WHO; 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Vu NV, Barrows HS. Use of standardized patients in clinical assessments: recent developments and measurement findings. Educational Researcher 1994;23(3):23–30.

  6. Adamo G. Simulated and standardized patients in OSCE achievement and challenges. Med Teach. 2003;25:262–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Hodges B et al. Evaluating communication skills in the objective structured clinical examination format: reliability and generalizability. Med Educ. 1996;30:38–43.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Wallace P. Coaching standardized patients: for use in the assessment of clinical competence. In: Wallace P, editor. New York: Springer Publishing Company; 2006.

  9. Schlegel C et al. Validity evidence and reliability of a simulated patient feedback instrument. BMC Med Educ. 2012;12:1–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Thompson JC, Kosmorsky GS, Ellis BD. Field of dreamers and dreamed-up fields: functional and fake perimetry. Ophthalmology. 1996;103:11725.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Colliver JA, Swartz MH. Assessing clinical performance with standardized patients. JAMA. 1997;278:7901.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Norman GR et al. Simulated patients. In: Neufeld VR, Norman GR, editors. Assessing clinical competence. New York: Springer Publishing Company; 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Gomez JM, et al. Clinical skills assessment with standardized patients. Med Educ. 1997;31(2):94–8.

  14. Ponzer S, Hylin U. Standardized patients—good help in teaching. They function as stand-ins in training of consultation and clinical skills. Lakartidningen. 2004;101(42):3240–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Vu NV. Steward DE, and Marcy M, An assessment of the consistency and accuracy of standardized patients’ simulations. J Med Educ. 1987;62:1002.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Colliver JA SM, Robbs RS, Lofquist M, Cohen D, Verhulst SJ. The effect of using multiple standardized patients on the intercase reliability of a large scale standardized patient examination administered over an extended testing period. Acad Med. 1998;73(10 suppl):S813.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Shirazi M et al. Training and validation of standardized patients for unannounced assessment of physicians’ management of depression. Acad Psychiatr. 2011;35(6):382–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Colliver JA. Validation of standardized-patient assessment: a meaning for clinical competence. Acad Med. 1995;70:1062–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Swartz MH, Colliver JA. Using standardized patients for assessing clinical performance: an overview. Mt Sinai J Med. 1996;63:241–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Chan CSY et al. Communication skill of general practitioners: any room for improvement? How much can it be improved? Med Educ. 2003;37:514–26.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Whelan R et al. Scoring standardized patient examinations: lessons learned from the development and administration of the ECFMG Clinical Skills Assessment (CSA®). Med Teach. 2005;27:200–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Donnon T, Lee M, Cairncross S. Using item analysis to assess objectively the quality of the Calgary-Cambridge OSCE Checklist. CMEJ, 2011;2(1):e16–e22.

  23. Keen AJA, Klein S, Alexander DA. Assessing the communication skills of doctors in training: reliability and sources of error. Adv Health Sci Educ. 2003;8:5–16.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Zanten VM, Boulet JR, McKinley D. Using standardized patients to assess the interpersonal skills of physicians: six years’ experience with a high-stakes certification examination. Health Commun. 2007;22(3):195–205.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Wasnick JD et al. Do residency applicants know what the ACGME core competencies are? One program’s experience. Acad Med. 2010;85(5):791–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Silverman J. Teaching clinical communication: a mainstream activity or just a minority sport? Patient Educ Couns. 2009;76(3):361–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Hausberg MC et al. Enhancing medical students’ communication skills: development and evaluation of an undergraduate training program. BMC Med Educ. 2012;12(1):16.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Boulet JR. Using SP-based assessments to make valid inferences concerning student abilities: pitfalls and challenges. Med Teach. 2012;34(9):681–2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Brinkman WB et al. Evaluation of resident communication skills and professionalism: a matter of perspective? Pediatrics. 2006;118(4):1371–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Boulet JR et al. Checklist content on a standardized patient assessment: an ex post facto review. Adv Health Sci Educ. 2008;13:59–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Fincher R-ME, Lewis LA. Simulations used to teach clinical skills. In: Norman GR, van der Vleuten CPM, Newble DI, editors. Int Handb Res Med Educ. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers; 2002. p. 499–535.

  32. Parkes J, Sinclair N, McCarty T. Appropriate expertise and training for standardized patient assessment examiners. Acad Psychiatr. 2009;33(4):285–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Rothman AI, Cusimano M. A comparison of physician examiners’, standardized patients’, and communication experts’ ratings of international medical graduates’ English proficiency. Acad Med. 2000;75(12):1206–11.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Gutton G et al. Communication skills in standardized-patient assessment of final-year medical students: a psychometric study. Adv Health Sci Educ. 2004;9:179–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Disclosure

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Tehran University of Medical Science, Tehran, Iran

    M. Shirazi, A. Labaf, F. Monjazebi, M. Jalili & M. Mirzazadeh

  2. Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden

    M. Shirazi, S. Ponzer & I. Masiello

Authors
  1. M. Shirazi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. A. Labaf
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. F. Monjazebi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. M. Jalili
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. M. Mirzazadeh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. S. Ponzer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. I. Masiello
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to F. Monjazebi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Shirazi, M., Labaf, A., Monjazebi, F. et al. Assessing Medical Students’ Communication Skills by the Use of Standardized Patients: Emphasizing Standardized Patients’ Quality Assurance. Acad Psychiatry 38, 354–360 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40596-014-0066-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40596-014-0066-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation