A community service-learning curriculum was established to give students opportunities to understand the interrelationship between family and community health, the differences between community and hospital medicine, and to be able to identify and solve community health problems. Students were divided into small groups to participate in community health works such as home visits etc. under supervision. This study was designed to evaluate the community service-learning program and to understand how students' attitude and learning activities affected students' satisfaction. The results revealed that most medical students had a positive attitude towards social service and citizenship but were conservative towards taking the role to serve people in the community. Students had achieved what they were required to learn especially the training in communication skills and ability to identify social issues. Students' attitude towards social service did not affect their opinions on the quality of the program and subjective rating on their achievement. The quality of the program was related to the quality of learning rated by the students.
There is a lack of information on the use of multi-source evaluation to assess trainees' interpersonal and communication skills in Oriental settings. This study is conducted to assess the reliability and applicability of assessing the interpersonal and communication skills of family medicine residents by patients, peer residents, nurses, and teaching staffs and to compare the ratings with the objective structured clinical examination (OSCE). Our results revealed instruments used by staffs, peers, nurses, and self-evaluation have good internal consistency reliability (α > 0.90), except for the behavioral checklist (α = 0.57). Staffs', peers', and nurses' evaluations were highly correlated with one another (r = 0.722 for staff- and peer-rating, r = 0.734 for staff- and nurse-rating, r = 0.634 for peer- and nurse-rating). However, residents' self-rating and patients-rating were not correlated to ratings by any other raters. OSCE evaluation was correlated to peer-rating (r = 0.533) and staff-rating (r = 0.642), but not correlated to self- or patient-rating. The generalizability study revealed the major sources of variance came from the types of rater and the interaction of residents and types of rater. This study found self-rating and patient-rating were not consistent with other sources of rating on residents' interpersonal and communication skills. Whether variations among different types of rater in a multi-source evaluation should be regarded as measurement errors or complementary information is worth further study.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.