These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
Pubmed for Handhelds
PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS
Search MEDLINE/PubMed
Title: A Pilot Comparison of In-Room and Video Ratings of Team Behaviors of Students in Interprofesional Teams. Author: Lie D, Richter-Lagha R, Byul Sarah Ma S. Journal: Am J Pharm Educ; 2018 Jun; 82(5):6487. PubMed ID: 30013246. Abstract: Objective. To examine concordance between in-room and video faculty ratings of interprofessional behaviors in a standardized team objective structured clinical encounter (TOSCE). Methods. In-room and video-rated student performance scores in an interprofessional 2-station TOSCE were compared using a validated 3-point scale assessing six team competencies. Scores for each student were derived from two in-room faculty members and one faculty member who viewed video recordings of the same team encounter from equivalent visual vantage points. All faculty members received the same rigorous rater training. Paired sample t-tests were used to compare individual student scores. McNemar's test was used to compare student pass/fail rates to determine the impact of rating modality on performance scores. Results. In-room and video student scores were captured for 12 novice teams (47 students) with each team consisting of students from four professions (medicine, pharmacy, physician assistant, nursing). Video ratings were consistently lower for all competencies and significantly lower for competencies of roles and responsibilities, and conflict management. Using a criterion of an average score of 2 out of 3 for at least one station for passing, 56% of students passed when rated in-room compared with 20% when rated by video. Conclusion. In-room and video ratings are not equal. Educators should consider scoring discrepancies based on modality when assessing team behaviors.[Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]