Expanding the Traditional History and Physical Examination to Address Chronic Diseases and Social Needs: A Multisite Randomized Control Trial of 4 Medical Schools

PURPOSEThis study gathers validity evidence of an expanded History and Physical examination (H&P 360) to address chronic diseases through incorporation of biopsychosocial elements that are lacking in traditional H&P assessments via a multisite randomized controlled trial among medical studen...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Academic Medicine 2020-11, Vol.95 (11S), p.S44-S50
Hauptverfasser: Kirley, Kate, Hayer, Rupinder, Khan, Tamkeen, Johnson, Eric, Sanchez, Erin Stephany, Kosowicz, Lynn, Terry, Valerie, Henderson, David, Krebsbach, Cory, Park, Yoon Soo, Dekhtyar, Michael, Williams, Brent C.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page S50
container_issue 11S
container_start_page S44
container_title Academic Medicine
container_volume 95
creator Kirley, Kate
Hayer, Rupinder
Khan, Tamkeen
Johnson, Eric
Sanchez, Erin Stephany
Kosowicz, Lynn
Terry, Valerie
Henderson, David
Krebsbach, Cory
Park, Yoon Soo
Dekhtyar, Michael
Williams, Brent C.
description PURPOSEThis study gathers validity evidence of an expanded History and Physical examination (H&P 360) to address chronic diseases through incorporation of biopsychosocial elements that are lacking in traditional H&P assessments via a multisite randomized controlled trial among medical students. METHODThird- and fourth-year medical students (n = 159) at 4 schools participated in an Objective Structured Clinical Examination designed with 2 cases for chronic disease. Students were randomized into the treatment group, which involved brief written instructions on how to use the H&P 360 followed by a standardized patient (SP) interaction, or the control group, which used the traditional H&P in an SP interaction without additional instructions. Validity evidence was gathered for content (alignment with an empirically derived expanded history list), response process (feedback from raters and learners on the process), internal structure (reliability and item-level psychometrics), relations to other variables (comparison between treatment and control groups), and consequences (survey results from learners on experience). RESULTSH&P 360 items were blueprinted by faculty experts. SP observation checklist grading was consistent, and postassessment debrief confirmed favorable educational experience among learners. The reliability of the H&P 360 was .76. Overall mean scores on the H&P 360 content (mean = 15.96, standard deviation [SD] = 3.66) were significantly higher compared with the traditional H&P (mean = 10.99, SD = 2.69, Cohen’s d = 1.17, P < .001). CONCLUSIONSMedical students using the H&P 360 collected significantly more biopsychosocial information compared with students using the traditional H&P, providing empirical support for teaching and assessing biopsychosocial information. The assessment demonstrated strong validity evidence supporting the use of the H&P 360 assessment in medical schools.
doi_str_mv 10.1097/ACM.0000000000003640
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2431827298</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2431827298</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5130-ecf1a58a798fa981d83e973a7a61c0a9b591ef4005afe23fdf2e84e50404e6293</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkc1u1DAUhSMEoqXwBgh5ySbFf0lsdqMwUKQOIFokdpEbXxODE09tR-30cfqkOJ2CEAvwxr73fuceyaconhN8TLBsXq3azTH-47Ca4wfFIZFMlAKLrw_zG3NcUs7rg-JJjN8zVDcVe1wcMNrUklfNYXG7vt6qSdvpG0oDoPOgtE3WT8qhExuTDzuUx-jTsIu2z831tRrtpBYEJY9WWgeIEbVD8JPt0RsbQUWId6Iz39ss-QCg42u0QpvZJRttAvQ5j_1ob0Cj1k8peJedF9YbxNEG9J3XWT947-LT4pFRLsKz-_uo-PJ2fd6elKcf371vV6dlXxGGS-gNUZVQjRRGSUG0YCAbphpVkx4reVFJAoZjXCkDlBltKAgOVf4jDjWV7Kh4ud-7Df5yhpi60cYenFMT-Dl2lDMiaEOlyCjfo33wMQYw3TbYUYVdR3C3pNPldLq_08myF_cO88UI-rfoVxwZEHvgyrsEIf5w8xWEbgDl0vC_3fwf0gUjQoiSYooJyUW5dCj7CVrfrMY</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2431827298</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Expanding the Traditional History and Physical Examination to Address Chronic Diseases and Social Needs: A Multisite Randomized Control Trial of 4 Medical Schools</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Journals@Ovid LWW Legacy Archive</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Kirley, Kate ; Hayer, Rupinder ; Khan, Tamkeen ; Johnson, Eric ; Sanchez, Erin Stephany ; Kosowicz, Lynn ; Terry, Valerie ; Henderson, David ; Krebsbach, Cory ; Park, Yoon Soo ; Dekhtyar, Michael ; Williams, Brent C.</creator><creatorcontrib>Kirley, Kate ; Hayer, Rupinder ; Khan, Tamkeen ; Johnson, Eric ; Sanchez, Erin Stephany ; Kosowicz, Lynn ; Terry, Valerie ; Henderson, David ; Krebsbach, Cory ; Park, Yoon Soo ; Dekhtyar, Michael ; Williams, Brent C.</creatorcontrib><description><![CDATA[PURPOSEThis study gathers validity evidence of an expanded History and Physical examination (H&P 360) to address chronic diseases through incorporation of biopsychosocial elements that are lacking in traditional H&P assessments via a multisite randomized controlled trial among medical students. METHODThird- and fourth-year medical students (n = 159) at 4 schools participated in an Objective Structured Clinical Examination designed with 2 cases for chronic disease. Students were randomized into the treatment group, which involved brief written instructions on how to use the H&P 360 followed by a standardized patient (SP) interaction, or the control group, which used the traditional H&P in an SP interaction without additional instructions. Validity evidence was gathered for content (alignment with an empirically derived expanded history list), response process (feedback from raters and learners on the process), internal structure (reliability and item-level psychometrics), relations to other variables (comparison between treatment and control groups), and consequences (survey results from learners on experience). RESULTSH&P 360 items were blueprinted by faculty experts. SP observation checklist grading was consistent, and postassessment debrief confirmed favorable educational experience among learners. The reliability of the H&P 360 was .76. Overall mean scores on the H&P 360 content (mean = 15.96, standard deviation [SD] = 3.66) were significantly higher compared with the traditional H&P (mean = 10.99, SD = 2.69, Cohen’s d = 1.17, P < .001). CONCLUSIONSMedical students using the H&P 360 collected significantly more biopsychosocial information compared with students using the traditional H&P, providing empirical support for teaching and assessing biopsychosocial information. The assessment demonstrated strong validity evidence supporting the use of the H&P 360 assessment in medical schools.]]></description><identifier>ISSN: 1040-2446</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1938-808X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000003640</identifier><identifier>PMID: 32769457</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins</publisher><subject>Chronic Disease ; Education, Medical, Undergraduate - methods ; Female ; Humans ; Male ; Medical History Taking ; Physical Examination ; Psychology</subject><ispartof>Academic Medicine, 2020-11, Vol.95 (11S), p.S44-S50</ispartof><rights>Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins</rights><rights>2020 by the Association of American Medical Colleges</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5130-ecf1a58a798fa981d83e973a7a61c0a9b591ef4005afe23fdf2e84e50404e6293</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5130-ecf1a58a798fa981d83e973a7a61c0a9b591ef4005afe23fdf2e84e50404e6293</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf><![CDATA[$$Uhttp://ovidsp.ovid.com/ovidweb.cgi?T=JS&CSC=Y&NEWS=N&PAGE=fulltext&PDF=y&D=ovft&AN=00001888-202011001-00012$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwolterskluwer$$H]]></linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttp://ovidsp.ovid.com/ovidweb.cgi?T=JS&amp;NEWS=n&amp;CSC=Y&amp;PAGE=fulltext&amp;D=ovft&amp;AN=00001888-202011001-00012$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwolterskluwer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,4609,27924,27925,64666,65461</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32769457$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Kirley, Kate</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hayer, Rupinder</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Khan, Tamkeen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Johnson, Eric</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sanchez, Erin Stephany</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kosowicz, Lynn</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Terry, Valerie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Henderson, David</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Krebsbach, Cory</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Park, Yoon Soo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dekhtyar, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Williams, Brent C.</creatorcontrib><title>Expanding the Traditional History and Physical Examination to Address Chronic Diseases and Social Needs: A Multisite Randomized Control Trial of 4 Medical Schools</title><title>Academic Medicine</title><addtitle>Acad Med</addtitle><description><![CDATA[PURPOSEThis study gathers validity evidence of an expanded History and Physical examination (H&P 360) to address chronic diseases through incorporation of biopsychosocial elements that are lacking in traditional H&P assessments via a multisite randomized controlled trial among medical students. METHODThird- and fourth-year medical students (n = 159) at 4 schools participated in an Objective Structured Clinical Examination designed with 2 cases for chronic disease. Students were randomized into the treatment group, which involved brief written instructions on how to use the H&P 360 followed by a standardized patient (SP) interaction, or the control group, which used the traditional H&P in an SP interaction without additional instructions. Validity evidence was gathered for content (alignment with an empirically derived expanded history list), response process (feedback from raters and learners on the process), internal structure (reliability and item-level psychometrics), relations to other variables (comparison between treatment and control groups), and consequences (survey results from learners on experience). RESULTSH&P 360 items were blueprinted by faculty experts. SP observation checklist grading was consistent, and postassessment debrief confirmed favorable educational experience among learners. The reliability of the H&P 360 was .76. Overall mean scores on the H&P 360 content (mean = 15.96, standard deviation [SD] = 3.66) were significantly higher compared with the traditional H&P (mean = 10.99, SD = 2.69, Cohen’s d = 1.17, P < .001). CONCLUSIONSMedical students using the H&P 360 collected significantly more biopsychosocial information compared with students using the traditional H&P, providing empirical support for teaching and assessing biopsychosocial information. The assessment demonstrated strong validity evidence supporting the use of the H&P 360 assessment in medical schools.]]></description><subject>Chronic Disease</subject><subject>Education, Medical, Undergraduate - methods</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical History Taking</subject><subject>Physical Examination</subject><subject>Psychology</subject><issn>1040-2446</issn><issn>1938-808X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkc1u1DAUhSMEoqXwBgh5ySbFf0lsdqMwUKQOIFokdpEbXxODE09tR-30cfqkOJ2CEAvwxr73fuceyaconhN8TLBsXq3azTH-47Ca4wfFIZFMlAKLrw_zG3NcUs7rg-JJjN8zVDcVe1wcMNrUklfNYXG7vt6qSdvpG0oDoPOgtE3WT8qhExuTDzuUx-jTsIu2z831tRrtpBYEJY9WWgeIEbVD8JPt0RsbQUWId6Iz39ss-QCg42u0QpvZJRttAvQ5j_1ob0Cj1k8peJedF9YbxNEG9J3XWT947-LT4pFRLsKz-_uo-PJ2fd6elKcf371vV6dlXxGGS-gNUZVQjRRGSUG0YCAbphpVkx4reVFJAoZjXCkDlBltKAgOVf4jDjWV7Kh4ud-7Df5yhpi60cYenFMT-Dl2lDMiaEOlyCjfo33wMQYw3TbYUYVdR3C3pNPldLq_08myF_cO88UI-rfoVxwZEHvgyrsEIf5w8xWEbgDl0vC_3fwf0gUjQoiSYooJyUW5dCj7CVrfrMY</recordid><startdate>202011</startdate><enddate>202011</enddate><creator>Kirley, Kate</creator><creator>Hayer, Rupinder</creator><creator>Khan, Tamkeen</creator><creator>Johnson, Eric</creator><creator>Sanchez, Erin Stephany</creator><creator>Kosowicz, Lynn</creator><creator>Terry, Valerie</creator><creator>Henderson, David</creator><creator>Krebsbach, Cory</creator><creator>Park, Yoon Soo</creator><creator>Dekhtyar, Michael</creator><creator>Williams, Brent C.</creator><general>Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins</general><general>by the Association of American Medical Colleges</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>202011</creationdate><title>Expanding the Traditional History and Physical Examination to Address Chronic Diseases and Social Needs: A Multisite Randomized Control Trial of 4 Medical Schools</title><author>Kirley, Kate ; Hayer, Rupinder ; Khan, Tamkeen ; Johnson, Eric ; Sanchez, Erin Stephany ; Kosowicz, Lynn ; Terry, Valerie ; Henderson, David ; Krebsbach, Cory ; Park, Yoon Soo ; Dekhtyar, Michael ; Williams, Brent C.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c5130-ecf1a58a798fa981d83e973a7a61c0a9b591ef4005afe23fdf2e84e50404e6293</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Chronic Disease</topic><topic>Education, Medical, Undergraduate - methods</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical History Taking</topic><topic>Physical Examination</topic><topic>Psychology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Kirley, Kate</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hayer, Rupinder</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Khan, Tamkeen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Johnson, Eric</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sanchez, Erin Stephany</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kosowicz, Lynn</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Terry, Valerie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Henderson, David</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Krebsbach, Cory</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Park, Yoon Soo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dekhtyar, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Williams, Brent C.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Academic Medicine</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Kirley, Kate</au><au>Hayer, Rupinder</au><au>Khan, Tamkeen</au><au>Johnson, Eric</au><au>Sanchez, Erin Stephany</au><au>Kosowicz, Lynn</au><au>Terry, Valerie</au><au>Henderson, David</au><au>Krebsbach, Cory</au><au>Park, Yoon Soo</au><au>Dekhtyar, Michael</au><au>Williams, Brent C.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Expanding the Traditional History and Physical Examination to Address Chronic Diseases and Social Needs: A Multisite Randomized Control Trial of 4 Medical Schools</atitle><jtitle>Academic Medicine</jtitle><addtitle>Acad Med</addtitle><date>2020-11</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>95</volume><issue>11S</issue><spage>S44</spage><epage>S50</epage><pages>S44-S50</pages><issn>1040-2446</issn><eissn>1938-808X</eissn><abstract><![CDATA[PURPOSEThis study gathers validity evidence of an expanded History and Physical examination (H&P 360) to address chronic diseases through incorporation of biopsychosocial elements that are lacking in traditional H&P assessments via a multisite randomized controlled trial among medical students. METHODThird- and fourth-year medical students (n = 159) at 4 schools participated in an Objective Structured Clinical Examination designed with 2 cases for chronic disease. Students were randomized into the treatment group, which involved brief written instructions on how to use the H&P 360 followed by a standardized patient (SP) interaction, or the control group, which used the traditional H&P in an SP interaction without additional instructions. Validity evidence was gathered for content (alignment with an empirically derived expanded history list), response process (feedback from raters and learners on the process), internal structure (reliability and item-level psychometrics), relations to other variables (comparison between treatment and control groups), and consequences (survey results from learners on experience). RESULTSH&P 360 items were blueprinted by faculty experts. SP observation checklist grading was consistent, and postassessment debrief confirmed favorable educational experience among learners. The reliability of the H&P 360 was .76. Overall mean scores on the H&P 360 content (mean = 15.96, standard deviation [SD] = 3.66) were significantly higher compared with the traditional H&P (mean = 10.99, SD = 2.69, Cohen’s d = 1.17, P < .001). CONCLUSIONSMedical students using the H&P 360 collected significantly more biopsychosocial information compared with students using the traditional H&P, providing empirical support for teaching and assessing biopsychosocial information. The assessment demonstrated strong validity evidence supporting the use of the H&P 360 assessment in medical schools.]]></abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins</pub><pmid>32769457</pmid><doi>10.1097/ACM.0000000000003640</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1040-2446
ispartof Academic Medicine, 2020-11, Vol.95 (11S), p.S44-S50
issn 1040-2446
1938-808X
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2431827298
source MEDLINE; Journals@Ovid LWW Legacy Archive; Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects Chronic Disease
Education, Medical, Undergraduate - methods
Female
Humans
Male
Medical History Taking
Physical Examination
Psychology
title Expanding the Traditional History and Physical Examination to Address Chronic Diseases and Social Needs: A Multisite Randomized Control Trial of 4 Medical Schools
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-27T20%3A59%3A03IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Expanding%20the%20Traditional%20History%20and%20Physical%20Examination%20to%20Address%20Chronic%20Diseases%20and%20Social%20Needs:%20A%20Multisite%20Randomized%20Control%20Trial%20of%204%20Medical%20Schools&rft.jtitle=Academic%20Medicine&rft.au=Kirley,%20Kate&rft.date=2020-11&rft.volume=95&rft.issue=11S&rft.spage=S44&rft.epage=S50&rft.pages=S44-S50&rft.issn=1040-2446&rft.eissn=1938-808X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1097/ACM.0000000000003640&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2431827298%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2431827298&rft_id=info:pmid/32769457&rfr_iscdi=true