Development of a Clinical Simulation Video to Evaluate Multiple Domains of Clinical Competence: Cross-Sectional Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Medical students in Japan undergo a 2-year postgraduate residency program to acquire clinical knowledge and general medical skills. The General Medicine In-Training Examination (GM-ITE) assesses postgraduate residents' clinical knowledge. A clinical simulation video (CSV) may assess learners' interpersonal abilities. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the relationship between GM-ITE scores and resident physicians' diagnostic skills by having them watch a CSV and to explore resident physicians' perceptions of the CSV's realism, educational value, and impact on their motivation to learn. METHODS: The participants included 56 postgraduate medical residents who took the GM-ITE between January 21 and January 28, 2021; watched the CSV; and then provided a diagnosis. The CSV and GM-ITE scores were compared, and the validity of the simulations was examined using discrimination indices, wherein ≥0.20 indicated high discriminatory power and >0.40 indicated a very good measure of the subject's qualifications. Additionally, we administered an anonymous questionnaire to ascertain participants' views on the realism and educational value of the CSV and its impact on their motivation to learn. RESULTS: Of the 56 participants, 6 (11%) provided the correct diagnosis, and all were from the second postgraduate year. All domains indicated high discriminatory power. The (anonymous) follow-up responses indicated that the CSV format was more suitable than the conventional GM-ITE for assessing clinical competence. The anonymous survey revealed that 12 (52%) participants found the CSV format more suitable than the GM-ITE for assessing clinical competence, 18 (78%) affirmed the realism of the video simulation, and 17 (74%) indicated that the experience increased their motivation to learn. CONCLUSIONS: The findings indicated that CSV modules simulating real-world clinical examinations were successful in assessing examinees' clinical competence across multiple domains. The study demonstrated that the CSV not only augmented the assessment of diagnostic skills but also positively impacted learners' motivation, suggesting a multifaceted role for simulation in medical education.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".