Suppr超能文献

USMLE Step 2 CS 病史采集评分与病史采集时间的关系:花更多时间写病史采集的考生是否能写出更好的病史采集?

The relationship between USMLE Step 2 CS patient note ratings and time spent on the note: do examinees who spend more time write better notes?

机构信息

National Board of Medical Examiners, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA.

出版信息

Acad Med. 2010 Oct;85(10 Suppl):S89-92. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181ed39d0.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

During the United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 2 Clinical Skills examination, examinees rotate through 12 standardized patient (SP) encounters. Examinees have 25 minutes per encounter to interact with SPs and complete postencounter patient notes (PNs), and they may end the SP interaction early to spend extra time on the PN. The current work assesses the time examinees are spending on PNs and whether this is related to performance on the PN.

METHOD

Encounters from 2,479 examinees' videos were time-stamped to indicate total encounter time and PN time. Hierarchical linear modeling was employed to assess how well total and PN time, along with other examinee and case-rater variables, predicted PN scores.

RESULTS

Examinee variables explained a significant portion of within-case-rater variability, but while PN time was significantly related to PN ratings, the effect was small.

CONCLUSIONS

The results suggest that spending additional time on the PN does not translate to a meaningful score increase.

摘要

背景

在美国医师执照考试第二步临床技能考试中,考生需要与 12 名标准化患者(SP)进行互动。每位考生有 25 分钟的时间与 SP 进行互动并完成 SP 后的患者记录(PN),考生也可以提前结束 SP 互动,以在 PN 上花费额外的时间。本研究旨在评估考生在 PN 上花费的时间,以及这是否与 PN 表现相关。

方法

对 2479 名考生视频中的互动进行时间标记,以显示总互动时间和 PN 时间。采用分层线性模型评估总时间和 PN 时间以及其他考生和病例评分者变量对 PN 分数的预测能力。

结果

考生变量解释了病例评分者内部变异性的很大一部分,但尽管 PN 时间与 PN 评分显著相关,但效果很小。

结论

结果表明,在 PN 上花费额外的时间并不会导致分数有显著提高。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验