2003
DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-138-6-200303180-00012
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Mini-CEX: A Method for Assessing Clinical Skills

Abstract: The measurement characteristics of the mini-CEX are similar to those of other performance assessments, such as standardized patients. Unlike these assessments, the difficulty of the examination will vary with the patients that a resident encounters. This effect is mitigated to a degree by the examiners, who slightly overcompensate for patient difficulty, and by the fact that each resident interacts with several patients. Furthermore, the mini-CEX has higher fidelity than these formats, permits evaluation based… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

13
419
2
74

Year Published

2006
2006
2013
2013

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 600 publications
(530 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
13
419
2
74
Order By: Relevance
“…This raises the question of whether or not we are capable of testing higher order thinking in a reliable and reproducible way. MCQs provide a potential option (our data offer limited support to that observation), but perhaps more resources should be targeted at more clinically realistic assessments such as OSCEs and ward-based assessments such as the mini-CEX (Norcini et al 2003) or newer types of assessment such as the Script Concordance test (Charlin et al 2000).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This raises the question of whether or not we are capable of testing higher order thinking in a reliable and reproducible way. MCQs provide a potential option (our data offer limited support to that observation), but perhaps more resources should be targeted at more clinically realistic assessments such as OSCEs and ward-based assessments such as the mini-CEX (Norcini et al 2003) or newer types of assessment such as the Script Concordance test (Charlin et al 2000).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[61][62][63][64] While professionalism rating scales are available 53,65 and have been employed in OSCEs and as part of peer evaluations, 66 they are often difficult to administer. Many aspects of professionalism are difficult to define, at least in terms of specific behaviours.…”
Section: Professionalismmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Existen algunos instrumentos para la valora ción de la entrevista mediante observación directa (Tabla II) [8,9]. Otros procedimientos, como la misma explora ción física u otros procedimientos manuales, se pueden supervisar invitando al estudiante a que los repita una vez ha visto como los realizamos (con las limitaciones obvias de cada caso), y viceversa, tras realizarla el estudiante, nosotros la repetiremos y en su caso corregiremos.…”
Section: Dar Feedback Al Estudianteunclassified