From the Classroom to Entrustment - The Development of Motivational Interviewing Skills as an Entrustable Professional Activity
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article was migrated. The article was marked as recommended. Introduction The move towards value-based care and population health has highlighted the prominent role of social and behavioral factors in determining health outcomes. Patient-centered behavioral guidance to improve patient self-management is recognized as an evidence-based intervention for a variety of chronic conditions but has yet to be adopted as a core competency or core entrustable professional activity (EPA). Motivational Interviewing (MI) is an evidence-based behavioral intervention involving an integrated set of competencies, featuring reflective listening, affirmation, evocation, and collaborative planning. An MI encounter is an observable, discrete task that can be framed as an EPA. Successful implementation of EPAs in the workplace requires institutional engagement, a thoughtful curricular approach, faculty development, and feasible, valid workplace-based assessment (WBA). Methods We implemented competency-based MI training and assessed competency outcomes for students and faculty. After joining the Association of American Medical Colleges Core EPA Pilot, we applied an iterative group process to develop an EPA and workplace-based assessment based on established MI competencies. Results Drawing upon nine years of developing MI curriculum, we present competency data for a student training study and a faculty coaching study, describe how we transitioned training from the classroom to the clinical setting employing an EPA framework, and present a one-page schematic and related WBA for an EPA based on MI. Conclusion We propose that MI is a core EPA for future physicians practicing value-based care, and offer a roadmap for curriculum implementation.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 it