Effectiveness of Teaching Communication Skills in Undergraduate Curriculum at Defence Services Medical Academy Myanmar: Mixed Qualitative and Quantitative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Good communication is the cornerstone of quality healthcare and it should be patient centered. Communication skills is taught and assessed with surrogates in undergraduate training. This study aimed to determine the effectiveness of communication skills taught in undergraduate period in reality. Methodology: It was a combined qualitative and quantitative methods. For qualitative assessment, phenomenology was used. Informal focus group semi-structured interview was done to groups of interns who had completed internship at medical wards. The responses were analyzed interpreted and classified; thematic analysis was done. For quantitative assessments, open ended questions were set by experts in medical education. The questions were answered anonymously; they were grouped into same themes. This study was approved by ‘Hospital Research and Ethics Committee’ of No(1) Defence Services General Hospital. Informed consent was taken from each intern. Results: A total 20 interns were included. Four themes were formed after thematic analysis: (1) the extent of applicability of communication skills they were taught in undergraduate days;(2) self-admitted confidence and degree of satisfaction; (3) the challenges/gaps they faced in reality; and (4) their suggestions on undergraduate teaching to fill the gaps. All interns admitted that the communication skills they taught was 100% applicable in practice. And they were confident out of proportion to their medical experience. They were satisfied with communication skills they were taught in undergraduate days. The challenges faced were as follows; difficulty in understanding volume and clarity of language when dealing with some nationality; low education level of patients leading to difficulty in understanding the information they have given; difficulty in getting trust from patient being youngest doctor in the team; and, taking long time due to emotional reaction of patient in breaking bad news. They admitted that they need to fill their knowledge gaps to answer the questions raised by patients particularly in explanation of diagnosis and management. They realized the importance of facial expression and tone of voice to express sympathy and empathy especially in breaking bad news. To improve communication skills in practice, they suggested to teach with real patients with real scenario. Conclusion: Teaching communication skills in undergraduate period was effective. The interns had good self-reported confidence. The interns need more training and self-directed learning. The challenges faced by interns were acceptable/logical. We should find better teaching method/media in undergraduate teaching to promote communication skills.
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 | 0.092 | 0.109 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".