The most requested factors in clinical skills exams for evaluating novice physicians: an internet-based survey of the general public in Japan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Clinical skills tests have been added to the national medical licensure examinations in Canada, the U.S., Korea and Switzerland. Adding a clinical skills test to the Japanese national medical licensure examination should also be considered under the Medical Practitioners Act. On the other hand, such tests might be costly and represent an economic burden to the nation's citizens. Thus, it is appropriate to obtain the opinion of the general public for the introduction of such tests. Although a clinical skills test can measure various competencies, it remains uncertain as to what should be measured. In this study, we aimed to ascertain public opinion regarding the clinical skills demanded of novice physicians. METHODS: We conducted an internet-based survey of the general public in Japan. We randomly selected 7,213 people aged 20 to 69 years. The main topics surveyed included: whether the Japanese government should add a skills test to the existing national medical licensure examination; what kind of skills should be included in this test; and who should pay for the examination. RESULTS: Of 3,093 (1,531 men and 1,562 women) people who completed the questionnaire (completion rate 42.9%), 90.5% (n = 2,800) responded that a clinical skills test should be part of the national medical licensure examination. The main skills which respondents thought should be included were "explaining and discussing medical issues in an appropriate manner to patients" (n = 2,176, 70.4%), "accurately diagnosing problems by conducting a physical examination" (n = 1,984, 64.1%), and "carefully interviewing patients to make a diagnosis" (n = 1,663; 53.8%). Three-fifths of the respondents (n = 1,900; 61.4%) responded that more than half of the cost of the examination should be paid by the Japanese government. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of respondents indicated that a clinical skills test should be added to the national medical licensure examination. These respondents who represent the general public were requesting the verification of communication, diagnostic interview and diagnostic physical examination skills. Medical educators should incorporate these public requests, and teach and assess medical students accordingly.
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 | 0.008 | 0.100 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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".