MedPath

Measuring Quality of Medical Student Performance at Contextualizing Care

Not Applicable
Completed
Conditions
Education, Medical, Undergraduate
Medical History Taking
Diagnosis
Interventions
Behavioral: Contextualization workshop
Registration Number
NCT01088438
Lead Sponsor
University of Illinois at Chicago
Brief Summary

During the project, fourth-year medical students participating in a Medicine sub-internship will be randomized to an intervention group or a control group; the intervention group will receive additional training in the application of qualitative methodology to elicit and incorporate contextual factors in the clinical encounter. All students will participate in an SP assessment consisting of four standardized patients (SPs), blinded to trial arm, presenting cases with and without important biomedical and contextual factors in a counterbalanced factorial design. Performance will be compared between trial arms; the investigators hypothesize better performance in the intervention arm. In addition, performance will be compared with United States Medical Licensing Exam (USMLE) Step 2 clinical knowledge scores to determine whether contextualizing ability is independent of clinical knowledge, and consistency of performance across individual SP cases will be studied to determine the number of cases necessary to achieve sufficient reliability for the assessment to be used.

Detailed Description

Clinical decision making requires two distinct skills: the ability to classify patients' conditions into diagnostic and management categories that permit the application of "best evidence" guidelines, and the ability to individualize or - more precisely - to contextualize care for patients whose circumstances and needs require variation from the standard approach to care. Most assessment in medical education places heavy emphasis on biomedical decision-making with little emphasis on how to incorporate contextual factors that may be essential to planning patients' care.

The goal of this project is to demonstrate and provide validity evidence for an innovative standardized patient (SP) method of assessing medical students in the clinical years on their ability to detect and respond to individual contextual factors in a patient encounter that overcomes the aforementioned challenges.

During the project, fourth-year medical students participating in a Medicine sub-internship will be randomized to an intervention group or a control group; the intervention group will receive additional training in the application of qualitative methodology to elicit and incorporate contextual factors in the clinical encounter. All students will participate in an SP assessment consisting of four SPs, blinded to trial arm, presenting cases with and without important biomedical and contextual factors in a counterbalanced factorial design. Performance will be compared between trial arms. In addition, performance will be compared with United States Medical Licensing Exam (USMLE) Step 2 clinical knowledge scores to determine whether contextualizing ability is independent of clinical knowledge, and consistency of performance across individual SP cases will be studied to determine the number of cases necessary to achieve sufficient reliability for the assessment to be used.

Recruitment & Eligibility

Status
COMPLETED
Sex
All
Target Recruitment
189
Inclusion Criteria
  • Fourth-year medical students at University of Illinois at Chicago
Exclusion Criteria

Not provided

Study & Design

Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Study Design
PARALLEL
Arm && Interventions
GroupInterventionDescription
Contextualization workshopContextualization workshopA four-hour course on contextualization.
Primary Outcome Measures
NameTimeMethod
Probing for Biomedical Issues1 month

Probability that the learner probes biomedical red flags raised in standardized patient encounters undertaken at assessment at end of subinternship. Each learner undertakes four encounters, each of which presents a biomedical red flag that may or may not be probed; in a small number of cases, the standardized patient was ill and the learner undertook fewer than four encounters as a result. Assessment of probing is made by an investigator blinded to learner's assignment to group.

Developing an Appropriate Treatment Plan (for Contextual Variant of Encounters)1 month

Probability that the learner writes a correct treatment plan for the standardized patient encounters undertaken at assessment at end of subinternship that include contextual red flags. All learners are scheduled to see 4 encounters, based on combinations of four cases and four potential variants (baseline, biomedical, contextual, biocontextual) with counterbalancing by study month; each has a single contextual variant encounter. Treatment plans are assessed by an investigator blinded to the learner's assignment to intervention or control group.

Probing for Contextual Issues1 month

Probability that the learner probes contextual red flags raised in standardized patient encounters undertaken at assessment at end of subinternship. Each learner undertakes four encounters, each of which presents a contextual red flag that may or may not be probed; in a small number of cases, the standardized patient was ill and the learner undertook fewer than four encounters as a result. Assessment of probing is made by an investigator blinded to learner's assignment to group.

Secondary Outcome Measures
NameTimeMethod

Trial Locations

Locations (1)

University of Illinois at Chicago

🇺🇸

Chicago, Illinois, United States

© Copyright 2025. All Rights Reserved by MedPath