Children and their parents assessing the doctor-patient interaction: A rating system for doctors' communication skills

Medical Education

Volumn 39, Issue 8, 2005, Pages 820-828

  Crossley, Jim ^a   Eiser, Christine ^b   Davies, Helena A ^a  

^a SHEFFIELD CHILDREN S HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

*physician patient relations; Clinical competence *standards; Communication; Paediatrics *methods; Parents psychology; Referrals and consultation

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DOCTOR PATIENT RELATION; FEASIBILITY STUDY; HUMAN; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; PERFORMANCE; RATING SCALE; RELIABILITY;

ADULT; CHILD; CLINICAL COMPETENCE; COMMUNICATION; FEASIBILITY STUDIES; HUMANS; PARENTS; PEDIATRICS; PHYSICIAN-PATIENT RELATIONS;

EID: 23044463383     PISSN: 03080110     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2929.2005.02230.x     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Hays RB, Davies HA, Beard JD et al. Selecting performance assessment methods for experienced physicians. Med Educ 2002;36(10):910-7.
2. General Medical Council (GMC). Report on Stage 1 of the Piloting Exercise and the Plans for Future Piloting Activity. London: GMC 2001.
3. Hays R. Assessment of general practice consultations: content validity of a rating scale. Med Educ 1990;24:110-16.
4. van Thiel J, Kraan H, van der Vleuten C. Reliability and feasibility of measuring medical interviewing skills: the revised Maastricht History-Taking and Advice Checklist. Med Educ 1991;25:224-9.
5. Campbell L, Howie J, Murray T. Use of video-taped consultations in summative assessment of trainees in general practice. Br J Gen Pract 1995;45:137-41.
6. Ram P, Grol R, Rethans JJ et al. Assessment of general practitioners by video observation of communicative and medical performance in daily practice: issues of validity, reliability and feasibility. Med Educ 1999;33 (6):447-54.
7. Tate P, Foulkes J, Neighbour R et al. Assessing physicians' interpersonal skills via videotaped encounters: a new approach for the Royal College of General Practitioners membership examination. J Health Commun 1999;4(2):143-52.
8. Donabedian A. The Criteria and Standards of Quality. Ann Arbour, MI: Health Adminstration Press 1982.
9. Sitzia J. How valid and reliable are patient satisfaction data? Int J Qual Health Care 1999;11:319-28.
10. Webster G. Final report on the Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire Project. Philadelphia: American Board of Internal Medicine 1989.
11. Nelson E, Gentry M, Mook K et al. How many patients are needed to provide reliable evaluations of individual clinicians? Med Care 2004;42(3): 259-66.
12. Newble D. Guidelines for the development of effective and efficient procedures for the assessment of clinical competence. In: Newble D, Jolly B, Wakeford R, eds. The Certification and Recertification of Doctors: Issues in the Assessment of Clinical Competence. Adelaide, Australia/New York 1991: 69-91.
13. Crossley J, Davies H. Doctors' consultations with children and their parents: a model of competencies, outcomes and confounding influences. Med Educ 2005; 39:807-819.
14. Woodward C. Questionnaire construction and question writing for research in medical education. ASME Medical Education Research Booklet, 4. Med Educ 1988;22:347.
15. Streiner D, Norman G. Reliability. In: Health Measurement Scales: a Practical Guide to Their Development and Use. New York: Oxford University Press 1995:104-27.
16. Crossley J, Humphris G, Jolly B. Assessing health professionals. Med Educ 2002;36(9):800-4.
17. Crossley J, Davies H, Humphris G et al. Generalisability: a key to unlock professional assessment. Med Educ 2002;36 (10):972-8.
18. Cronbach L, Gleser G, Nanda H et al. The Dependability of Behavioural Measurements: Theory of Generalizability for Scores and Profiles. New York: Wiley 1972.
19. Cleary P, McNeil B. Patient satisfaction as an indicator of quality care. Inquiry 1988;25:25-36.
20. General Medical Council (GMC). Good Medical Practice. London: GMC 1998.