Comparison of the medical students' perceived self-efficacy and the evaluation of the observers and patients

Background: The accuracy of self-assessment has been questioned in studies comparing physicians' self-assessments to observed assessments; however, none of these studies used self-efficacy as a method for self-assessment. The aim of the study was to investigate how medical students' perceived self-efficacy of specific communication skills corresponds to the evaluation of simulated patients and observers. Methods: All of the medical students who signed up for an Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) were included. As a part of the OSCE, the student performance in the "parent-physician interaction" was evaluated by a simulated patient and an observer at one of the stations. After the examination the students were asked to assess their self-efficacy according to the same specific communication skills. The Calgary Cambridge Observation Guide formed the basis for the outcome measures used in the questionnaires. A total of 12 items was rated on a Likert scale from 1-5 (strongly disagree to strongly agree). We used extended Rasch models for comparisons between the groups of responses of the questionnaires. Comparisons of groups were conducted on dichotomized responses. Results: Eighty-four students participated in the examination, 87% (73/84) of whom responded to the questionnaire. The response rate for the simulated patients and the observers was 100%. Significantly more items were scored in the highest categories (4 and 5) by the observers and simulated patients compared to the students (observers versus students: -0.23; SE: 0.112; p=0.002 and patients versus students: 0.177; SE: 0.109; p=0.037). When analysing the items individually, a statistically significant difference only existed for two items. Conclusion: This study showed that students scored their communication skills lower compared to observers or simulated patients. The differences were driven by only 2 of 12 items. The results in this study indicate that self-efficacy based on the Calgary Cambridge Observation guide seems to be a reliable tool.