A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Evaluation of an occupational medicine patient consultation note assessment tool. | LitMetric

Evaluation of an occupational medicine patient consultation note assessment tool.

Occup Med (Lond)

Division of Occupational Medicine, Department of Medicine, St Michael's Hospital, 36 Toronto St., Suite 700, Toronto, Ontario M5C2C5, Canada.

Published: February 2022

Background: Medical education focuses on assessment, diagnosis and management of various clinical entities. The communication of this information, particularly in the written form, is rarely emphasized. Though there have been assessment tools developed to support medical learner improvement in this regard, none are oriented to occupational medicine (OM) practice.

Aims: This study was aimed to develop and evaluate an assessment tool for consultation letters, by modifying a previously validated assessment tool to suit practice in OM.

Methods: Using an iterative process, OM specialists added to the Consultation Letter Rating Scale (CLRS) of the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada (henceforth abbreviated as RC) additional questions relevant to communication in the OM context. The tool was then used by two OM specialists to rate 40 anonymized OM clinical consultation letters. Inter-rater agreement was measured by percent agreement, kappa statistic and intraclass correlation.

Results: There was generally good percent agreement (>80% for the majority of the RC and OM questions). Intraclass correlation for the five OM questions total scores was slightly higher than the intraclass correlations for the five RC questions (0.59 versus 0.46, respectively), suggesting that our modifications performed at least as well as the original tool.

Conclusions: This new tool designed specifically for evaluation of patient consultation notes in OM provides a good option for medical educators in a variety of practice areas in providing non-summative, low-stakes assessment and/or feedback to nurture increased competency in written communication skills for postgraduate trainees in OM.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/occmed/kqab154DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

assessment tool
12
occupational medicine
8
patient consultation
8
consultation letters
8
percent agreement
8
assessment
6
consultation
5
tool
5
evaluation occupational
4
medicine patient
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!