[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-317042-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-317042-en":131},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","assessing-communication-skills-of-medical-students-in-objective-structured-clinical-examinations-osce-a-systematic-review-of-rating-scales","Assessing Communication Skills of Medical Students in Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCE) - A Systematic Review of Rating Scales","","Systematic review examining how medical students’ communication skills are assessed in Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCE) and how rating scales influence validity. The review summarizes existing communication-skills rating scales, their definitions, and the methodological quality of psychometric studies using the COSMIN checklist, alongside psychometric-property quality criteria by Terwee and colleagues. Results include twelve studies covering eight rating scales, with mainly poor study methods and intermediate psychometric quality, underscoring the need for improved future evaluations.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/","Research & Report",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/assessing-communication-skills-of-medical-students-in-objective-structured-clinical-examinations-osce-a-systematic-review-of-rating-scales/317042/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/assessing-communication-skills-of-medical-students-in-objective-structured-clinical-examinations-osce-a-systematic-review-of-rating-scales/317042.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"Cart","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-28","2026-09-20",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",12,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"What is the purpose of this systematic review?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"To provide an overview of existing rating scales used in OSCEs for assessing medical students’ communication skills, including their underlying definitions and the methodological and psychometric quality of the scale studies.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"How were studies selected and assessed?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"The review used a systematic search across EMBASE, PsycINFO, and PubMed, plus reference tracking and expert consultation. Methodological quality was assessed with the COSMIN checklist, and psychometric-property quality used Terwee and colleagues’ criteria.",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"What were the main findings about rating scales and study quality?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"Twelve studies covering eight rating scales were included. Methodological quality of included studies was mainly poor, while the psychometric quality of the rating scales was mainly intermediate.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},317042,1790126141,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,92,96,101,106,111,115,120,123,127],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":97,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":98,"show_sort_weight":99,"slug":100},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":102,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":103,"show_sort_weight":104,"slug":105},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":107,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":108,"show_sort_weight":109,"slug":110},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":112,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":113,"slug":114},8,30,"research-report",{"id":116,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":117,"show_sort_weight":118,"slug":119},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":118,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":121,"show_sort_weight":118,"slug":122},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":124,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":125,"show_sort_weight":124,"slug":126},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":128,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":129,"show_sort_weight":97,"slug":130},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":132},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":133,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":134,"doc_module":4,"category_id":112,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":135,"file_id":136,"file_url":137,"file_type":138,"file_size":139,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":140,"language":141,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":142,"faqs":143,"seo_title":144,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":145,"read_time":146,"preview_page_count":4},18829141979164,"https://eur-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_6f874abed73319feea01a86fa6f0fab8","OPEN ACCESS  \nCitation: Cömert M, Zill JM, Christalle E, Dirmaier J, Härter M, Scholl I (2016) Assessing Communication Skills of Medical Students in Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCE) -A Systematic Review of Rating Scales. PLoS ONE 11(3): e0152717 .  \ndoi:10.1371/journal.pone.0152717  \nEditor: Robert K Hills, Cardiff University, UNITED KINGDOM  \nReceived: October 16, 2015  \nAccepted: March 17, 2016  \nPublished: March 31, 2016  \nCopyright: © 2016 Cömert et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.  \nData Availability Statement: All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.  \nFunding: This project was funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (grant number 01GX1043), [www.bmbf.de](www.bmbf.de. The funders)[. The funders](www.bmbf.de. The funders) had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.  \nCompeting Interests: MC and EC declare that they have no competing interests. MH is co-PI in a research project funded by Mundipharma GmBH, a pharmaceutical company; IS conducted one  \nRESEARCH ARTICLE  \nAssessing Communication Skills of Medical Students in Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCE) -A Systematic Review of Rating Scales  \nMusa Cömert, Jördis Maria Zill, Eva Christalle, Jörg Dirmaier, Martin Härter, Isabelle Scholl *  \nDepartment of Medical Psychology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany  \n* [i.scholl@uke.de](i.scholl@uke.de)  \nAbstract  \nBackground  \nTeaching and assessment of communication skills have become essential in medical education. The Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) has been found as an appropriate means to assess communication skills within medical education. Studies have demonstrated the importance of a valid assessment of medical students’ communication skills. Yet, the validity of the performance scores depends fundamentally on the quality of the rating scales used in an OSCE. Thus, this systematic review aimed at providing an overview of existing rating scales, describing their underlying definition of communication skills, determining the methodological quality of psychometric studies and the quality of psychometric properties of the identified rating scales.  \nMethods  \nWe conducted a systematic review to identify psychometrically tested rating scales, which have been applied in OSCE settings to assess communication skills of medical students. Our search strategy comprised three databases (EMBASE, PsycINFO, and PubMed), reference tracking and consultation of experts. We included studies that reported psychometric properties of communication skills assessment rating scales used in OSCEs by examiners only. The methodological quality of included studies was assessed using the COnsensus based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist. The quality of psychometric properties was evaluated using the quality criteria of Terwee and colleagues.  \nResults  \nData of twelve studies reporting on eight rating scales on communication skills assessment in OSCEs were included. Five of eight rating scales were explicitly developed based on a  \nphysician training in shared-decision making within this research project. MH is PI in a research project funded by Lilly Pharma, a pharmaceutical company; JD and JZ currently work on this research project. The authors did not receive funding from Mundipharm GmBH nor from Lilly Pharma for this systematic review. This does not alter the authors' adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.  \nspecific definition of communication skills. The methodological quality of studies was mainly poor. The psychometric quality of the eight rating scales was mai","cbCaip2KIFbc5ci5","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaip2KIFbc5ci5","pdf",401901,15,"English","# Abstract\n# Methods\n# Results\n# Discussion\n# Introduction","[{\"question\":\"What is the purpose of this systematic review?\",\"answer\":\"To provide an overview of existing rating scales used in OSCEs for assessing medical students’ communication skills, including their underlying definitions and the methodological and psychometric quality of the scale studies.\"},{\"question\":\"How were studies selected and assessed?\",\"answer\":\"The review used a systematic search across EMBASE, PsycINFO, and PubMed, plus reference tracking and expert consultation. Methodological quality was assessed with the COSMIN checklist, and psychometric-property quality used Terwee and colleagues’ criteria.\"},{\"question\":\"What were the main findings about rating scales and study quality?\",\"answer\":\"Twelve studies covering eight rating scales were included. Methodological quality of included studies was mainly poor, while the psychometric quality of the rating scales was mainly intermediate.\"}]","Assessing Communication Skills of Medical Students in Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCE) - A Systematic Review of Rating Scales | PDF",1789928145,38]