Relationship of resident characteristics, attitudes, prior training and clinical knowledge to communication skills performance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: A substantial body of literature demonstrates that communication skills in medicine can be taught and retained through teaching and practice. Considerable evidence also reveals that characteristics such as gender, age, language and attitudes affect communication skills performance. Our study examined the characteristics, attitudes and prior communication skills training of residents to determine the relationship of each to patient-doctor communication. The relationship between communication skills proficiency and clinical knowledge application (biomedical and ethical) was also examined through the use of doctor-developed clinical content checklists, as very little research has been conducted in this area. METHODS: A total of 78 first- and second-year residents across all departments at Dalhousie Medical School participated in a videotaped 4-station objective structured clinical examination presenting a range of communication and clinical knowledge challenges. A variety of instruments were used to gather information and assess performance. Two expert raters evaluated the videotapes. RESULTS: Significant relationships were observed between resident characteristics, prior communication skills training, clinical knowledge and communication skills performance. Females, younger residents and residents with English as first language scored significantly higher, as did residents with prior communication skills training. A significant positive relationship was found between the clinical content checklist and communication performance. Gender was the only characteristic related significantly to attitudes. CONCLUSIONS: Gender, age, language and prior communication skills training are related to communication skills performance and have implications for resident education. The positive relationship between communication skills proficiency and clinical knowledge application is important and should be explored further.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".