OBJECTIVE: Establish the inter-rater reliability and the concept, convergent and construct validity of an instrument for assessing the competency of physicians in patient education. METHODS: Three raters assessed the quality of patient education in 30 outpatient consultations with the CELI instrument. This instrument is based on a goal-directed model of patient education and assesses distinctive skills for patient education categorized in four subcompetencies. The inter-rater reliability was calculated. The concept validity was explored by factor analysis. The convergent validity was established by a comparison with two measures of patient-centred behaviour. The construct validity was explored by relating the subcompetencies with physician gender and patient satisfaction. RESULTS: The inter-rater reliability for the subcompetencies varied between 0.65 and 0.91. The factor analysis distinguished the four subcompetencies. All subcompetencies correlated with the measures of patient-centred behaviour. Female physicians performed better than male physicians on three subcompetencies. Positive correlations were found for three subcompetencies and patient satisfaction. CONCLUSION: The CELI instrument appears to be a reliable and valid instrument. However, further research is needed to establish the generalizability and construct validity. PRACTICE IMPLICATION: The CELI instrument is a useful tool for assessment and feedback in medical education since it assesses the performance of distinctive skills.
OBJECTIVE: Establish the inter-rater reliability and the concept, convergent and construct validity of an instrument for assessing the competency of physicians in patient education. METHODS: Three raters assessed the quality of patient education in 30 outpatient consultations with the CELI instrument. This instrument is based on a goal-directed model of patient education and assesses distinctive skills for patient education categorized in four subcompetencies. The inter-rater reliability was calculated. The concept validity was explored by factor analysis. The convergent validity was established by a comparison with two measures of patient-centred behaviour. The construct validity was explored by relating the subcompetencies with physician gender and patient satisfaction. RESULTS: The inter-rater reliability for the subcompetencies varied between 0.65 and 0.91. The factor analysis distinguished the four subcompetencies. All subcompetencies correlated with the measures of patient-centred behaviour. Female physicians performed better than male physicians on three subcompetencies. Positive correlations were found for three subcompetencies and patient satisfaction. CONCLUSION: The CELI instrument appears to be a reliable and valid instrument. However, further research is needed to establish the generalizability and construct validity. PRACTICE IMPLICATION: The CELI instrument is a useful tool for assessment and feedback in medical education since it assesses the performance of distinctive skills.
Authors: Patricia A Carney; Ryan T Palmer; Marissa Fuqua Miller; Erin K Thayer; Sue E Estroff; Debra K Litzelman; Frances E Biagioli; Cayla R Teal; Ann Lambros; William J Hatt; Jason M Satterfield Journal: Acad Med Date: 2016-05 Impact factor: 6.893