The Change of CPX Scores according to Repeated CPXs

Lee, Yoon Hee; Park, Jae Hyun; Ko, Jin Kyung; Yoo, Hyo Bin

doi:10.3946/kjme.2011.23.3.193

Cited by 12 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…CPX scores increased with repeated usage of cases in a previous study, which improvement may be explained by an increase in test awareness of examinees or a maturation effect during an additional period of educational experience. 8) In this study, students' sectional CPX scores improved in all areas within each group over 5 months of clinical clerkship. However, only competency of history taking improved more among the intervention group compared with the control group.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 60%

Effects of Module Development and Role Play Course on Clinical Practice Examination Scores during a 4th Year Clerkship

Park

Kim

et al. 2018

Korean J Fam Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundAfter introduction of clinical skills assessment in the Korean Medical Licensing Examination, medical schools have reinforced both experiential learning with real patients and preparatory programs. This study was conducted to investigate whether a clinical practice examination (CPX) preparation program improves students' CPX score in terms of case specificity.MethodsOne hundred and thirteen senior students in a medical school participated in this study. During the fourth-year clerkship, 28 students (24.8%) from three rotation groups took a 3-day CPX preparation course consisting of module development, role play, and comprehensive physical exam skills training. Eleven rotation groups (n=85) were compared as control. Both the intervention and control group took two comprehensive CPXs before and after the clerkship was completed.ResultsThere was no significant difference in age, sex, and school type between the two groups. On pre-test CPX, there was no significant difference in total and sectional scores between the two groups. On post-test CPX, total scores of the intervention group were higher than those of the control groups (69.5±4.3 vs. 67.5±4.4, P<0.05). History taking scores were higher in intervention groups (70.0±6.0 vs. 66.0±6.6, P=0.01). The station scores of vaginal discharge with case similarity were higher in the intervention groups (73.0±6.3 vs. 68.9±9.3, P=0.03).ConclusionA short CPX preparation course improved history taking ability, but its effect was greater only in a specific case, similar to the pre-course case. Whether this effect was due to the test experience or true improvement in competency requires further investigation.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 60%

Effects of Module Development and Role Play Course on Clinical Practice Examination Scores during a 4th Year Clerkship

Park

Kim

et al. 2018

Korean J Fam Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Repeated practice could narrow the gaps between the students' performance in clinical and technical skills before and after graduation, whereas their performance in patient-physician interaction might have remained unchanged or underwent little change because of the lack of emphasis on this area. (11,12) Therefore, the correlations between the performance of the interns and their performance as medical students in terms of clinical and technical skills were not as strong as expected. Finally, the medical faculty may have placed a high value on communication and interpersonal skills in their overall assessments of the interns; (6) thus, these parameters may be the most valid indices of the ward evaluation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 74%

Does medical students' clinical performance affect the actual performance during medical internship?

Han¹,

Chung²

2016

smedj

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

INTRODUCTIONIt is crucial that medical students acquire appropriate clinical skills. These skills include the ability to gather and interpret information provided by patients, as well as the ability to formulate treatment plans based on medical knowledge obtained in preclinical/clinical courses and interactions with patients during their clinical clerkship. The clinical performance of medical students is expected to affect their future performance as doctors.In 1975, Harden et al (1) introduced a structured clinical examination that assessed the performance of medical students based on factors such as their skills, attitudes, problem-solving abilities and factual knowledge. The implementation of clinical skills examinations had a positive effect on the clinical performance of medical graduates. Medical graduates who passed a clinical skills examination were less likely to be judged as deficient when compared to those who had not taken the examination. (2,3) The relationship between the performance of medical students in clinical skills examinations and their actual performance as doctors (as rated by supervising directors) has yet to be definitively established. In one study, the clinical performance of students was found to be positively associated with their supervising consultants' assessment during their preregistration house officer year; however, this result did not reach the conventional levels of statistical significance.(4) In a different study, although statistical significance was also not shown, the score among all the parameters of the students' performance was found to be more correlated with the students' performance as first-year residents. On the other hand, one study showed that only the interpersonal score from the prototype examination correlated with the students' future performance as interns. (6) The Clinical Performance Examination (CPX) assesses communication skills, professional attributes, clinical skills and knowledge in realistic clinical encounters, (7) while the Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) measures technical skills. Thus, we hypothesised that the performance of a student in the CPX and OSCE could affect his or her performance as a doctor. The present study aimed to investigate whether the clinical performance of medical students, as measured by the CPX and OSCE, would be able to predict their performance as doctors in a clinical setting. This study also aimed to identify which component(s) of the students' performance in the CPX and OSCE was dominant in the relationship with their actual performance as doctors.

show abstract

“…There have been concerns that standardized patients do not realize the precise intention of the rating scale method, as they are preoccupied with checking each performance item. 18) Nevertheless, these results suggest that standardized patients adapt easily to the rating scale method, and this highlights the need to improve the validity of the rating scale method rather than replacing it with the checklist method.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Comparison of Patient-Physician Interaction Scores of Clinical Practice Examination between Checklists and Rating Scale

Kim

Park

et al. 2018

Korean J Fam Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe clinical practice examination (CPX) was introduced in 2010, and the Seoul-Gyeonggi CPX Consortium developed the patient-physician interaction (PPI) assessment tool in 2004. Both institutions use rating scales on classified sections of PPI but differ in their scoring of key components. This study investigated the accuracy of standardized patient scores across rating scales by comparing checklist methods and verified the concurrent validity of two comparable PPI rating tools.MethodsAn educational CPX module dyspepsia case was administered to 116 fourth-year medical students at Hanyang University College of Medicine. One experienced standardized patient rated exams using two different PPI scales. She scored checklists composed of 43 items related to the two original PPI scales through video clips of the same students. From these checklists, we calculated Pearson's correlation coefficient.ResultsThe correlations of total PPI score between the checklist and rating scale methods were 0.29 for the Korean Medical Licensing Examination (KMLE) tool and 0.30 for the consortium tool. The correlations between the KMLE and consortium tools were 0.74 for checklists and 0.83 for rating scales. In terms of section scores, the consortium tool showed only three significant correlations between the two methods out of seven sections and the KMLE tool showed only two statistically significant correlations out of five sections.ConclusionThe rating scale and checklist methods exhibited a weak relationship in the PPI assessment, but a high correlation between assessment tools using the same method. However, the current rating scale requires modification by reorganizing key scoring components through factor analysis.

show abstract

The Change of CPX Scores according to Repeated CPXs

Cited by 12 publications

References 14 publications

Effects of Module Development and Role Play Course on Clinical Practice Examination Scores during a 4th Year Clerkship

Effects of Module Development and Role Play Course on Clinical Practice Examination Scores during a 4th Year Clerkship

Does medical students' clinical performance affect the actual performance during medical internship?

Comparison of Patient-Physician Interaction Scores of Clinical Practice Examination between Checklists and Rating Scale

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About