目的:评估学习者在书面和基于绩效的沟通技巧(CS)评估结果之间可能的关联,在并行或预测性研究设计中。
方法:搜索包括四个数据库,用于同行评审研究,包含书面和基于绩效的CS评估。11项研究符合纳入标准。
结果:纳入的研究主要评估本科医学生。研究报告主要是书面和基于绩效的评估结果之间的低至中等相关性(客观结构化临床检查或与模拟患者的相遇),相关系数为0.13~0.53(p<0.05)。当特定的CS,就像动机性访谈一样进行了评估。只有少数研究为两种评估格式提供了足够的可靠性指标。
结论:书面评估分数似乎可以在有限的程度上预测基于绩效的评估,但不能完全取代它们。评估工具的心理测量特性的报告对于改善对未来发现的解释至关重要,并可能影响其对绩效的预测有效性。
结论:在纵向CS评估计划中,建议对包括书面评估在内的评估进行三角测量,考虑到可能的限制。带有反馈的书面评估可以帮助学生和培训师详细阐述程序知识,作为对CS到不同环境的获取和转移的有力支持。
To evaluate possible associations between learners\' results in written and performance-based assessments of communication skills (CS), either in concurrent or predictive study designs.
Search included four databases for peer-reviewed studies containing both written and performance-based CS assessment. Eleven studies met the inclusion criteria.
Included studies predominantly assessed undergraduate medical students. Studies reported mainly low to medium correlations between written and performance-based assessment results (Objective Structured Clinical Examinations or encounters with simulated patients), and gave correlation coefficients ranging from 0.13 to 0.53 (p < 0.05). Higher correlations were reported when specific CS, like motivational interviewing were assessed. Only a few studies gave sufficient reliability indicators of both assessment formats.
Written assessment scores seem to predict performance-based assessments to a limited extent but cannot replace them entirely. Reporting of assessment instruments\' psychometric properties is essential to improve the interpretation of future findings and could possibly affect their predictive validity for performance.
Within longitudinal CS assessment programs, triangulation of assessment including written assessment is recommended, taking into consideration possible limitations. Written assessments with feedback can help students and trainers to elaborate on procedural knowledge as a strong support for the acquisition and transfer of CS to different contexts.