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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Dreimüller, Nadine, Schenkel, Stefan, Stoll, Marlene, Koch, Cora, Lieb, Klaus, Juenger, Jana
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