Standardized patient assessments are used routinely in high-stakes licensure examinations (1). The most important consideration for such examinations is whether they measure skills that are important in the clinical evaluation of patients—whether the examinations are valid. One of the key validity considerations is the role of expert judgment, and some educators have argued that physicians, not standardized patients, are the only appropriate judges of patient care skills (2). Although expertise is indeed a critical factor in valid determinations of clinical skills, it is essential to define the requisite expertise and to infuse that expertise throughout the assessment process rather than only when assigning final scores. So although expertise in clinical skills examiners is unequivocally required, those designing high-stakes performance assessments must answer a series of questions. Exactly what expertise is required? How is that expertise acquired? Where does expertise reside in the assessment process? How is examination expertise evidenced? The responses to these questions have implications for training examiners and, more generally, for designing assessments that use standardized patients. Performance examinations that use standardized patients often assess at least two relatively distinct skill sets: clinical skills (obtaining the history and examining the patient) and communication skills (the techniques
Appropriate Expertise and Training for Standardized Patient Assessment Examiners
Abstract
Standardized patient assessments are used routinely in high-stakes licensure examinations (1). The most important consideration for such examinations is whether they measure skills that are important in the clinical evaluation of patients—whether the examinations are valid. One of the key validity considerations is the role of expert judgment, and some educators have argued that physicians, not standardized patients, are the only appropriate judges of patient care skills (2). Although expertise is indeed a critical factor in valid determinations of clinical skills, it is essential to define the requisite expertise and to infuse that expertise throughout the assessment process rather than only when assigning final scores. So although expertise in clinical skills examiners is unequivocally required, those designing high-stakes performance assessments must answer a series of questions. Exactly what expertise is required? How is that expertise acquired? Where does expertise reside in the assessment process? How is examination expertise evidenced? The responses to these questions have implications for training examiners and, more generally, for designing assessments that use standardized patients. Performance examinations that use standardized patients often assess at least two relatively distinct skill sets: clinical skills (obtaining the history and examining the patient) and communication skills (the techniquesPreview Only. This article cannot be rented because we do not currently have permission from the publisher.
/lp/american-psychiatric-publishing-inc-journal/appropriate-expertise-and-training-for-standardized-patient-assessment-VDFPaFCluh
Welcome to DeepDyve! Rent Premier Research Articles and Save Up to 90%
Preview Only
Appropriate Expertise and Training for Standardized Patient Assessment Examiners
Parkes, Jay; Sinclair, Nancy; McCarty, Teresita
Follow Academic Psychiatry
, Volume 33 (4): 285
American Psychiatric Publishing, Inc (Journal) – Jul 1, 2009
More Info
More Like This Article
View All dataSource[]=actageo&dataSource[]=aspet&dataSource[]=aaos&dataSource[]=aacc&dataSource[]=aacr&dataSource[]=aea&dataSource[]=aip&dataSource[]=ajnr&dataSource[]=ams&dataSource[]=aps_physical&dataSource[]=appi_book&dataSource[]=appi_journal&dataSource[]=apha&dataSource[]=asip&dataSource[]=asm&dataSource[]=asn&dataSource[]=aspb&dataSource[]=avs&dataSource[]=annual_reviews&dataSource[]=arxiv&dataSource[]=acm&dataSource[]=berghahn&dataSource[]=cabi&dataSource[]=clinical_trials&dataSource[]=dailymed&dataSource[]=degruyter&dataSource[]=du_press&dataSource[]=esa&dataSource[]=eu_press&dataSource[]=elsevier&dataSource[]=emerald&dataSource[]=ejtr&dataSource[]=emea&dataSource[]=epo&dataSource[]=faseb&dataSource[]=gsa&dataSource[]=health_affairs&dataSource[]=hindawi&dataSource[]=imanager&dataSource[]=imedpub&dataSource[]=informa_healthcare&dataSource[]=informs&dataSource[]=iop&dataSource[]=iucr&dataSource[]=iospress&dataSource[]=jbjs&dataSource[]=leftcoast&dataSource[]=lu_press&dataSource[]=mesharpe&dataSource[]=mary_ann_liebert&dataSource[]=medline&dataSource[]=mit_press&dataSource[]=nature&dataSource[]=oxford&dataSource[]=pier_professional&dataSource[]=pnas&dataSource[]=portlandpress&dataSource[]=psyc_articles&dataSource[]=psyc_books&dataSource[]=psyc_critiques&dataSource[]=plos_journal&dataSource[]=pubmed_central&dataSource[]=rsna&dataSource[]=rockefeller&dataSource[]=rcn&dataSource[]=ria&dataSource[]=rsc&dataSource[]=sage&dataSource[]=spie&dataSource[]=springer_journal&dataSource[]=springer&dataSource[]=taylor_francis&dataSource[]=aps&dataSource[]=the_scientist&dataSource[]=uc_press&dataSource[]=uspto_abstract&dataSource[]=wiley&dataSource[]=pct
© 2012 DeepDyve, Inc. All rights reserved.
Terms of Service | Privacy Policy
