Cargando…
Applying a validated scoring rubric to pre-clerkship medical students’ standardized patient notes: a pilot study
BACKGROUND: With the elimination in 2021 of the United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 2 Clinical Skills test, it is incumbent upon U.S. medical schools to develop local validated assessments of clinical reasoning. While much attention has been paid to summative exams for graduating studen...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10339528/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37438775 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-023-04424-9 |
_version_ | 1785071864506220544 |
---|---|
author | Gallagher, Benjamin D. Green, Michael L. Talwalkar, Jaideep S. |
author_facet | Gallagher, Benjamin D. Green, Michael L. Talwalkar, Jaideep S. |
author_sort | Gallagher, Benjamin D. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: With the elimination in 2021 of the United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 2 Clinical Skills test, it is incumbent upon U.S. medical schools to develop local validated assessments of clinical reasoning. While much attention has been paid to summative exams for graduating students, formative exams for pre-clerkship students have not been well studied. METHODS: We applied the University of Illinois at Chicago College of Medicine (UIC-COM) Patient Note (PN) Scoring Rubric to templated PNs written by 103 pre-clerkship students for two cases in an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) at the Yale School of Medicine. The rubric consists of four section scores (Documentation, Differential Diagnosis, Justification, and Workup, each scored 1 to 4) and a composite score (scaled 23 to 100). We calculated item discrimination for each section score and Cronbach’s alpha for each case. We surveyed students about their experience writing the templated PN. RESULTS: Mean Documentation, Differential Diagnosis, Justification, Workup, and composite scores for case A were 2.16, 1.80, 1.65, 2.29, and 47.67, respectively. For case B, the scores were 2.13, 1.21, 1.60, 1.67, and 40.54, respectively. Item discrimination ranged from 0.41 to 0.80. Cronbach’s alpha for cases A and B was 0.48 and 0.25, respectively. A majority of the students felt that the exercise was useful and appropriate to their level of training. CONCLUSIONS: Despite performing poorly, pre-clerkship students found the note-writing task beneficial. Reliability of the scoring rubric was suboptimal, and modifications are needed to make this exercise a suitable measure of clinical reasoning. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12909-023-04424-9. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10339528 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-103395282023-07-14 Applying a validated scoring rubric to pre-clerkship medical students’ standardized patient notes: a pilot study Gallagher, Benjamin D. Green, Michael L. Talwalkar, Jaideep S. BMC Med Educ Research BACKGROUND: With the elimination in 2021 of the United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 2 Clinical Skills test, it is incumbent upon U.S. medical schools to develop local validated assessments of clinical reasoning. While much attention has been paid to summative exams for graduating students, formative exams for pre-clerkship students have not been well studied. METHODS: We applied the University of Illinois at Chicago College of Medicine (UIC-COM) Patient Note (PN) Scoring Rubric to templated PNs written by 103 pre-clerkship students for two cases in an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) at the Yale School of Medicine. The rubric consists of four section scores (Documentation, Differential Diagnosis, Justification, and Workup, each scored 1 to 4) and a composite score (scaled 23 to 100). We calculated item discrimination for each section score and Cronbach’s alpha for each case. We surveyed students about their experience writing the templated PN. RESULTS: Mean Documentation, Differential Diagnosis, Justification, Workup, and composite scores for case A were 2.16, 1.80, 1.65, 2.29, and 47.67, respectively. For case B, the scores were 2.13, 1.21, 1.60, 1.67, and 40.54, respectively. Item discrimination ranged from 0.41 to 0.80. Cronbach’s alpha for cases A and B was 0.48 and 0.25, respectively. A majority of the students felt that the exercise was useful and appropriate to their level of training. CONCLUSIONS: Despite performing poorly, pre-clerkship students found the note-writing task beneficial. Reliability of the scoring rubric was suboptimal, and modifications are needed to make this exercise a suitable measure of clinical reasoning. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12909-023-04424-9. BioMed Central 2023-07-13 /pmc/articles/PMC10339528/ /pubmed/37438775 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-023-04424-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Gallagher, Benjamin D. Green, Michael L. Talwalkar, Jaideep S. Applying a validated scoring rubric to pre-clerkship medical students’ standardized patient notes: a pilot study |
title | Applying a validated scoring rubric to pre-clerkship medical students’ standardized patient notes: a pilot study |
title_full | Applying a validated scoring rubric to pre-clerkship medical students’ standardized patient notes: a pilot study |
title_fullStr | Applying a validated scoring rubric to pre-clerkship medical students’ standardized patient notes: a pilot study |
title_full_unstemmed | Applying a validated scoring rubric to pre-clerkship medical students’ standardized patient notes: a pilot study |
title_short | Applying a validated scoring rubric to pre-clerkship medical students’ standardized patient notes: a pilot study |
title_sort | applying a validated scoring rubric to pre-clerkship medical students’ standardized patient notes: a pilot study |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10339528/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37438775 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-023-04424-9 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT gallagherbenjamind applyingavalidatedscoringrubrictopreclerkshipmedicalstudentsstandardizedpatientnotesapilotstudy AT greenmichaell applyingavalidatedscoringrubrictopreclerkshipmedicalstudentsstandardizedpatientnotesapilotstudy AT talwalkarjaideeps applyingavalidatedscoringrubrictopreclerkshipmedicalstudentsstandardizedpatientnotesapilotstudy |