Construct Validation of the Arizona Clinical Interview Rating Scale

Stillman, Paula L.; Brown, David R.; Redfield, Doris L.; Sabers, Darrell L.

doi:10.1177/001316447703700427

Cited by 83 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The results of the current study compare favourably with other studies, reported in Table 1. Where internal consistency measures have been reported, these are noted to be 0.79 or more (Arthur 1999, Norcini et al 2003, Silverman et al 2011, Stillman, Sabers, and Redfield 1976, Stillman et al 1977), a level achieved by all raters in the current study with the exception of rater 6.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 74%

“…A review of published single interview assessment tools revealed a number of instruments for consideration (Arthur 1999, McGraw and O'Connor 1999, Norcini et al 2003, Silverman et al 2011, Stillman, Sabers, and Redfield 1976, Stillman et al 1977, Zraick, Allen, and Johnson 2003. Table 1 provides details of each of these tools.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Secondly, the majority of the other tools were developed for use by SPs in assessing students rather than for use by CEs, and primarily for summative assessment (Arthur 1999, McGraw and O'Connor 1999, Stillman, Sabers, and Redfield 1976, Stillman et al 1977. Boulet et al (2008) reported that performance in SP interviews for development of history-taking and physical examination skills is typically assessed by the SP.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

An Investigation of the Standardised Patient Interview Rating Scale (SPIRS) for the Assessment of Speech Pathology Students in a Simulation Clinic

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standardised patients (SPs) are increasingly utilised in health sciences education to assist students in the development of clinical competencies, including interviewing skills. This study investigated the development and validation of a rating scale for formative assessment of speech pathology students in an interview with an SP. Participants in this study were 76 undergraduate speech pathology students and 10 clinical educators who participated in a simulated clinic module. As part of the module, pairs of students interviewed an SP portraying a parent of a child with speech delay. The Standardised Patient Interview Rating Scale (SPIRS) was developed to assess students' foundation clinical competencies of communication, interviewing and professional practice skills. Students' interviews were videotaped, rated individually on the SPIRS by the clinical educator, and later re-rated by an expert rater. Data were analysed to determine the content validity, internal consistency, and inter-rater reliability of the tool. In addition, descriptive statistics were used to report student performance levels. Results indicated that the SPIRS had good content validity and internal consistency but that there may be some redundancy in individual items. An acceptable level of inter-rater reliability was achieved. Students generally scored highly, with non-verbal communication being the easiest and professional practice the most difficult skill to demonstrate. The SPIRS was found to be an appropriate tool for formative assessment of students in this simulated clinic module. Recommendations for improving its reliability were made. Further research is required to investigate use of the SPIRS as an assessment tool in other contexts utilising standardised patients.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 74%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

An Investigation of the Standardised Patient Interview Rating Scale (SPIRS) for the Assessment of Speech Pathology Students in a Simulation Clinic

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…62 Few tools have been developed for assessing communication skills in isolation. Examples of such tools include the Arizona Clinical Interview Rating Scale (ACIR), 63 Calgary-Cambridge Observational Guide, 64 and the SEGUE. 65 Certain tools are better for less experienced faculty (i.e., checklists like the Kalamazoo and SEGUE), while expert faculty members may find other rating scale tools (i.e., Four Habits 59,60 ) more useful.…”

Section: The Toolsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing Interpersonal and Communication Skills in Emergency Medicine

Chan

Wallner

Swoboda

et al. 2012

Academic Emergency Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Interpersonal and communication skills (ICS) are a key component of several competency-based schemata and key competency in the set of six Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) core competencies. With the shift toward a competency-based educational framework, the importance of robust learner assessment becomes paramount. The journal Academic Emergency Medicine (AEM) hosted a consensus conference to discuss education research in emergency medicine (EM). This article summarizes the initial preparatory research that was conducted to brief consensus conference attendees and reports the results of the consensus conference breakout session as it pertains to ICS assessment of learners. The goals of this consensus conference session were to twofold: 1) to determine the state of assessment of observable learner performance and 2) to determine a research agenda within the ICS field for medical educators. The working group identified six key recommendations for medical educators and researchers.

show abstract

“…The Calgary-Cambridge Observation Guide, 8 the Brown University Interpersonal Skill Evaluation (BUISE), 20 and the Arizona Clinical Interview Rating Scale (ACIR) 21 have all been used to assess medical students in practice settings. Their interrater reliability ranges from 0.52-0.87 for the ACIR to 0.91 for the BUISE.…”

Section: Summary Of Assessment Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of Communication and Interpersonal Skills Competencies

Hobgood

Riviello

Jourıles

et al. 2002

Academic Emergency Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Excellent communication and interpersonal (C-IP) skills are a universal requirement for a well-rounded emergency physician. This requirement for C-IP skill excellence is a direct outgrowth of the expectations of our patients and a prerequisite to working in the increasingly complex emergency department environment. Directed education and assessment of C-IP skills are critical components of all emergency medicine (EM) training programs and now are a requirement of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) Outcome Project. In keeping with its mission to improve the quality of EM education and in response to the ACGME Outcome Project, the Council of Emergency Medicine Residency Directors (CORD-EM) hosted a consensus conference focusing on the application of the six core competencies to EM. The objective of this article is to report the results of this consensus conference as it relates to the C-IP competency. There were four primary goals: 1) define the C-IP skills competency for EM, 2) define the assessment methods currently used in other specialties, 3) identify the methods suggested by the ACGME for use in C-IP skills, and 4) analyze the applicability of these assessment techniques to EM. Ten specific communication competencies are defined for EM. Assessment techniques for evaluation of these C-IP competencies and a timeline for implementation are also defined. Standardized patients and direct observation were identified as the criterion standard assessment methods of C-IP skills; however, other methods for assessment are also discussed. Key words: communication; interpersonal skills; core competency; assessment. ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE 2002; 9:1257-1269 Emergency department (ED) patient encounters are unique in medicine. They are often a single encounter for a new/unknown patient, and the duration and quality of the encounter are influenced by time pressures. As such, the emergency physician (EP) must quickly establish rapport and trust with the patient, gather information, assess the cause of the emergency, and design a treatment plan. The EP must also be able to effectively communicate findings and plans with the patient, the family, and other members of the health care team. Communication and interpersonal (C-IP) skills are a key component of a well-rounded EP. These skills

show abstract

Construct Validation of the Arizona Clinical Interview Rating Scale

Cited by 83 publications

References 7 publications

An Investigation of the Standardised Patient Interview Rating Scale (SPIRS) for the Assessment of Speech Pathology Students in a Simulation Clinic

An Investigation of the Standardised Patient Interview Rating Scale (SPIRS) for the Assessment of Speech Pathology Students in a Simulation Clinic

Assessing Interpersonal and Communication Skills in Emergency Medicine

Assessment of Communication and Interpersonal Skills Competencies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About