Exploring the validity and reliability of a questionnaire for evaluating virtual patient design with a special emphasis on fostering clinical reasoning

Background: The design of Virtual Patients (VPs) is essential. So far there are no validated evaluation instruments for VP design published. Summary of work: We examined three sources of validity evidence of an instrument to be filled out by students aimed at measuring the quality of VPs with a special emphasis on fostering clinical reasoning: (1) Content was examined based on theory of clinical reasoning and an international VP expert team. (2) Response process was explored in think aloud pilot studies with students and content analysis of free text questions accompanying each item of the instrument. (3) Internal structure was assessed by confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) using 2547 student evaluations and reliability was examined utilizing generalizability analysis. Summary of results: Content analysis was supported by theory underlying Gruppen and Frohna’s clinical reasoning model on which the instrument is based and an international VP expert team. The pilot study and analysis of free text comments supported the validity of the instrument. The CFA indicated that a three factor model comprising 6 items showed a good fit with the data. Alpha coefficients per factor were 0,74 - 0,82. The findings of the generalizability studies indicated that 40-200 student responses are needed in order to obtain reliable data on one VP. Conclusions: The described instrument has the potential to provide faculty with reliable and valid information about VP design. Take-home messages: We present a short instrument which can be of help in evaluating the design of VPs.

Exploring the validity and reliability of a questionnaire for evaluating virtual patient design with a special emphasis on fostering clinical reasoning

Background: Virtual patients (VPs) are increasingly used to train clinical reasoning. So far, no validated evaluation instruments for VP design are available. Aims: We examined the validity of an instrument for assessing the perception of VP design by learners. Methods: Three sources of validity evidence were examined: (i) Content was examined based on theory of clinical reasoning and an international VP expert team. (ii) The response process was explored in think-aloud pilot studies with medical students and in content analyses of free text questions accompanying each item of the instrument. (iii) Internal structure was assessed by exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and inter-rater reliability by generalizability analysis. Results: Content analysis was reasonably supported by the theoretical foundation and the VP expert team. The think-aloud studies and analysis of free text comments supported the validity of the instrument. In the EFA, using 2547 student evaluations of a total of 78 VPs, a three-factor model showed a reasonable fit with the data. At least 200 student responses are needed to obtain a reliable evaluation of a VP on all three factors. Conclusion: The instrument has the potential to provide valid information about VP design, provided that many responses per VP are available.

Measuring Spatial Presence: Introducing and Validating the Pictorial Presence SAM

The aim of the present study was to develop a pictorial presence scale using selfassessment- manikins (SAM). The instrument assesses presence sub-dimensions (selflocation and possible actions) as well as presence determinants (attention allocation, spatial situation model, higher cognitive involvement, and suspension of disbelief). To qualitatively validate the scale, think-aloud protocols and interviews (n = 12) were conducted. The results reveal that the SAM items are quickly filled out as well as easily, intuitively, and unambiguously understood. Furthermore, the instrument’s validity and sensitivity was quantitatively examined in a two-factorial design (n = 317). Factors were medium (written story, audio book, video, and computer game) and distraction (non-distraction vs. distraction). Factor analyses reveal that the SAM presence dimensions and determinants closely correspond to those of the MEC Spatial Presence Questionnaire, which was used as a comparison measure. The findings of the qualitative and quantitative validation procedures show that the Pictorial Presence SAM successfully assesses spatial presence. In contrast to the verbal questionnaire data (MEC), the significant distraction effect suggests that the new scale is even more sensitive. This points out that the scale can be a useful alternative to existing verbal presence selfreport measures.

Improving the Assessment of Communication Skills at the Swiss Federal Licensing Exam: Results of a Student's Needs Assessment

Introduction With a three year project the assessment of communication skills within the Swiss Federal Licensing Examinations (FLE) shall be improved. As a first step a needs assessment among communication experts and medical students of the Swiss Medical Faculties will be performed. In this presentation the results of the students’ needs assessment will be presented. Methods A bilingual student’s online questionnaire will be developed by an expert panel taking relevant literature, the Swiss Catalogue of Learning Objectives and other consensus statements for communication (e.g., the European and Basler consensus statements) into account. With a think aloud study response process validity evidence will be sought. The questionnaire will focus on the following topics related to communication skills: (1) What has been taught?, (2) What has been assessed in the faculty exams?, (3) What has been assessed in the FLE?, (4) What should have been assessed in the FLE and how should the assessment be improved? Results Results of the students’ needs assessment will be available by the end of 2015 and be presented. Conclusions/ Take-home message We hope for valuable input for improving the assessment of communications skills within the FLE also from the students’ side. Results of the needs assessment from the students and experts will be combined and taken as input for an international expert symposium on how to improve the communication skills assessment within the FLE.