Communicating the diagnosis of cancer or depression: Results of a randomized controlled online study using video vignettes

Kühne, Franziska; Fauth, Henriette; Ay-Bryson, Destina Sevde; Visser, Leonie N. C.; Weck, Florian

doi:10.1002/cam4.4396

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 38 publications

(41 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the area of therapist competence, it is not easy to identify clear convergent and discriminant measures, because professional communication, empathy, and working alliance capture unique aspects but are still considered part of therapist competence ( 41 ). As already shown by other studies ( 23 , 42 ), the intercorrelation between these variables is relatively high. Also, the performance of specific CBT techniques, as captured by the more global competency scales CTS or ACSS, cannot be separated from the way they are delivered (e.g., in what way and how emphatically they are communicated).…”

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 78%

The concise measurement of clinical communication skills: Validation of a short scale

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveThere is a lack of brief rating scales for the reliable assessment of psychotherapeutic skills, which do not require intensive rater training and/or a high level of expertise. Thus, the objective is to validate a 14-item version of the Clinical Communication Skills Scale (CCSS-S).MethodsUsing a sample of N = 690 video-based ratings of role-plays with simulated patients, we calculated a confirmatory factor analysis and an exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM), assessed convergent validities, determined inter-rater reliabilities and compared these with those who were either psychology students, advanced psychotherapy trainees, or experts.ResultsCorrelations with other competence rating scales were high (rs > 0.86–0.89). The intraclass correlations ranged between moderate and good [ICC(2,2) = 0.65–0.80], with student raters yielding the lowest scores. The one-factor model only marginally replicated the data, but the internal consistencies were excellent (α = 0.91–95). The ESEM yielded a two-factor solution (Collaboration and Structuring and Exploration Skills).ConclusionThe CCSS-S is a brief and valid rating scale that reliably assesses basic communication skills, which is particularly useful for psychotherapy training using standardized role-plays. To ensure good inter-rater reliabilities, it is still advisable to employ raters with at least some clinical experience. Future studies should further investigate the one- or two-factor structure of the instrument.

show abstract