Evolution of Clinical Skills Assessment in the USMLE: Looking to the Future After Step 2 CS Discontinuation.

The COVID-19 pandemic interrupted administration of the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 2 Clinical Skills (CS) exam in March 2020 due to public health concerns. As the scope and magnitude of the pandemic became clearer, the initial plans by the USMLE program's sponsoring organizations (NBME and Federation of State Medical Boards) to resume Step 2 CS in the short-term shifted to long-range plans to relaunch an exam that could harness technology and reduce infection risk. Insights about ongoing changes in undergraduate and graduate medical education and practice environments, coupled with challenges in delivering a transformed examination during a pandemic, led to the January 2021 decision to permanently discontinue Step 2 CS.

Technology Can Augment, but Not Replace, Critical Human Skills Needed for Patient Care.

The practice of medicine is changing rapidly as a consequence of electronic health record adoption, new technologies for patient care, disruptive innovations that breakdown professional hierarchies, and evolving societal norms. Collectively, these have resulted in the modification of the physician's role as the gatekeeper for health care, increased shift-based care, and amplified interprofessional team-based care. Technological innovations present opportunities as well as challenges.

Navigating Tumultuous Change in the Medical Profession: The Coalition for Physician Accountability.

Collaboration among the national organizations responsible for self-regulation in medicine in the United States is critical, as achieving the quadruple aim of enhancing the patient experience and improving population health while lowering costs and improving the work life of clinicians and staff is becoming more challenging. The leaders of the national organizations responsible for accreditation, assessment, licensure, and certification recognize this and have come together as the Coalition for Physician Accountability. The coalition, which meets twice per year, was created in 2011 as a discursive space for group discussion and action related to advancing health care, promoting professional accountability, and improving the education, training, and assessment of physicians.

Improving Residency Selection Requires Close Study and Better Understanding of Stakeholder Needs.

The United States Medical Licensing Examination has long been valued by state medical boards as an evidence-based, objective assessment of an individual's progressive readiness for the unsupervised practice of medicine. As a secondary use, it is also valued by residency program directors in resident selection. In response to Chen and colleagues' consideration of changing Step 1 scoring to pass/fail, contextual and germane information is offered in this Invited Commentary, including a discussion of potential consequences, risks, and benefits of such a change.

The Residency Application Process: Pursuing Improved Outcomes Through Better Understanding of the Issues.

The residency application process requires that applicants, their schools, and residency programs exchange and evaluate information to accomplish successful matching of applicants to postgraduate training positions. The different motivations of these stakeholders influence both the types of information provided by medical schools and the perceived value and completeness of information received by residency programs. National standards have arisen to shape the type and format of information reported by medical schools about their students, though criticisms about the candor and completeness of the information remain.

Enhancement of the assessment of physician-patient communication skills in the United States Medical Licensing Examination.

The National Board of Medical Examiners (NBME) reviewed all components of the United States Medical Licensing Examination as part of a strategic planning activity. One recommendation generated from the review called for enhancements of the communication skills component of the Step 2 Clinical Skills (Step 2 CS) examination. To address this recommendation, the NBME created a multidisciplinary team that comprised experts in communication content, communication measurement, and implementation of standardized patient (SP)-based examinations.

Feasibility of implementing a standardized multisource feedback program in the graduate medical education environment.

Background: Multisource feedback (MSF) is emerging as a central assessment method for several medical education competencies. Planning and resource requirements for a successful implementation can be significant. Our goal is to examine barriers and challenges to a successful multisite MSF implementation, and identify the benefits of MSF as perceived by participants.

The relationship between direct observation, knowledge, and feedback: results of a national survey.

Background: Multisource feedback can provide a comprehensive picture of a medical trainee's performance. The utility of a multisource feedback system could be undermined by lack of direct observation and accurate knowledge.

Method: The National Board of Medical Examiners conducted a national survey of medical students, interns, residents, chief residents, and fellows to learn the extent to which certain behaviors were observed, to examine beliefs about knowledge of each other's performance, and to assess feedback.

Faculty development in assessment: the missing link in competency-based medical education.

As the medical education community celebrates the 100th anniversary of the seminal Flexner Report, medical education is once again experiencing significant pressure to transform. Multiple reports from many of medicine's specialties and external stakeholders highlight the inadequacies of current training models to prepare a physician workforce to meet the needs of an increasingly diverse and aging population. This transformation, driven by competency-based medical education (CBME) principles that emphasize the outcomes, will require more effective evaluation and feedback by faculty.

The quality of written comments on professional behaviors in a developmental multisource feedback program.

Background: Written feedback on professional behaviors is an important part of medical training, but little attention has been paid to the quality of written feedback and its expected impact on learning. A large body of research on feedback suggests that feedback is most beneficial when it is specific, clear, and behavioral. Analysis of feedback comments may reveal opportunities to improve the value of feedback.

Validity considerations in the assessment of professionalism.

During the last decade, interest in assessing professionalism in medical education has increased exponentially and has led to the development of many new assessment tools. Efforts to validate the scores produced by tools designed to assess professionalism have lagged well behind the development of these tools. This paper provides a structured framework for collecting evidence to support the validity of assessments of professionalism.

Remediation of the deficiencies of physicians across the continuum from medical school to practice: a thematic review of the literature.

Despite widespread endorsement of competency-based assessment of medical trainees and practicing physicians, methods for identifying those who are not competent and strategies for remediation of their deficits are not standardized. This literature review describes the published studies of deficit remediation at the undergraduate, graduate, and continuing medical education levels. Thirteen studies primarily describe small, single-institution efforts to remediate deficient knowledge or clinical skills of trainees or below-standard-practice performance of practicing physicians.

Assessment of medical professionalism: who, what, when, where, how, and ... why?

Medical professionalism is increasingly recognized as a core competence of medical trainees and practitioners. Although the general and specific domains of professionalism are thoroughly characterized, procedures for assessing them are not well-developed. This article outlines an approach to designing and implementing an assessment program for medical professionalism that begins and ends with asking and answering a series of critical questions about the purpose and nature of the program.