Cargando…
Development of a checklist for evaluating psychiatric reports
BACKGROUND: Performing a psychiatric interview and documenting the recorded findings in the form of a brief psychiatric report is one of the main learning goals in the psychiatric curriculum for medical students. However, observing and assessing students‘ reports is time consuming and there are no o...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6498494/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31046745 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-019-1559-1 |
_version_ | 1783415620851728384 |
---|---|
author | Dreimüller, Nadine Schenkel, Stefan Stoll, Marlene Koch, Cora Lieb, Klaus Juenger, Jana |
author_facet | Dreimüller, Nadine Schenkel, Stefan Stoll, Marlene Koch, Cora Lieb, Klaus Juenger, Jana |
author_sort | Dreimüller, Nadine |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Performing a psychiatric interview and documenting the recorded findings in the form of a brief psychiatric report is one of the main learning goals in the psychiatric curriculum for medical students. However, observing and assessing students‘ reports is time consuming and there are no objective assessment tools at hand. Thus, we applied an integrative approach for designing a checklist that evaluates clinical performance, as a tool for the assessment of a psychiatric report. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature yielded no objective instrument for assessing the quality of written reports of psychiatric interviews. We used a 4-step mixed-methods approach to design a checklist as an assessment tool for psychiatric reports: 1. Development of a draft checklist, using literature research and focus group interviews; 2. Pilot testing and subsequent group discussion about modifications resulting from the pilot testing; 3. Creating a scoring system; 4. Testing for interrater-reliability, internal consistency and validity. RESULTS: The final checklist consisted of 36 items with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.833. Selectivity of items ranged between 0.080 and 0.796. After rater-training, an interrater-reliability of 0.96 (ICC) was achieved. CONCLUSIONS: Our approach, which integrated published evidence and the knowledge of domain experts, resulted in a reliable and valid checklist. It offers an objective instrument to measure the ability to document psychiatric interviews. It facilitates a transparent assessment of students’ learning goals with the goal of structural alignment of learning goals and assessment. We discuss ways it may additionally be used to measure the ability to perform a psychiatric interview and supplement other assessment formats. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12909-019-1559-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6498494 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-64984942019-05-09 Development of a checklist for evaluating psychiatric reports Dreimüller, Nadine Schenkel, Stefan Stoll, Marlene Koch, Cora Lieb, Klaus Juenger, Jana BMC Med Educ Research Article BACKGROUND: Performing a psychiatric interview and documenting the recorded findings in the form of a brief psychiatric report is one of the main learning goals in the psychiatric curriculum for medical students. However, observing and assessing students‘ reports is time consuming and there are no objective assessment tools at hand. Thus, we applied an integrative approach for designing a checklist that evaluates clinical performance, as a tool for the assessment of a psychiatric report. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature yielded no objective instrument for assessing the quality of written reports of psychiatric interviews. We used a 4-step mixed-methods approach to design a checklist as an assessment tool for psychiatric reports: 1. Development of a draft checklist, using literature research and focus group interviews; 2. Pilot testing and subsequent group discussion about modifications resulting from the pilot testing; 3. Creating a scoring system; 4. Testing for interrater-reliability, internal consistency and validity. RESULTS: The final checklist consisted of 36 items with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.833. Selectivity of items ranged between 0.080 and 0.796. After rater-training, an interrater-reliability of 0.96 (ICC) was achieved. CONCLUSIONS: Our approach, which integrated published evidence and the knowledge of domain experts, resulted in a reliable and valid checklist. It offers an objective instrument to measure the ability to document psychiatric interviews. It facilitates a transparent assessment of students’ learning goals with the goal of structural alignment of learning goals and assessment. We discuss ways it may additionally be used to measure the ability to perform a psychiatric interview and supplement other assessment formats. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12909-019-1559-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2019-05-02 /pmc/articles/PMC6498494/ /pubmed/31046745 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-019-1559-1 Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Dreimüller, Nadine Schenkel, Stefan Stoll, Marlene Koch, Cora Lieb, Klaus Juenger, Jana Development of a checklist for evaluating psychiatric reports |
title | Development of a checklist for evaluating psychiatric reports |
title_full | Development of a checklist for evaluating psychiatric reports |
title_fullStr | Development of a checklist for evaluating psychiatric reports |
title_full_unstemmed | Development of a checklist for evaluating psychiatric reports |
title_short | Development of a checklist for evaluating psychiatric reports |
title_sort | development of a checklist for evaluating psychiatric reports |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6498494/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31046745 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-019-1559-1 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT dreimullernadine developmentofachecklistforevaluatingpsychiatricreports AT schenkelstefan developmentofachecklistforevaluatingpsychiatricreports AT stollmarlene developmentofachecklistforevaluatingpsychiatricreports AT kochcora developmentofachecklistforevaluatingpsychiatricreports AT liebklaus developmentofachecklistforevaluatingpsychiatricreports AT juengerjana developmentofachecklistforevaluatingpsychiatricreports |