Gregg Robbins-Welty, Dakota May, Kristen Shirey, Cameron Strong, Catarina Carosa, Carter Vanderloo, Jordan Hildenbrand, Heather Vestal, Paul Riordan, David Yanez, Reginald Lerebours, Kathy Niu
{"title":"\"Read One, Write One\": Improving Medical Student Clinical Documentation on the Psychiatry Clerkship Using Example Notes.","authors":"Gregg Robbins-Welty, Dakota May, Kristen Shirey, Cameron Strong, Catarina Carosa, Carter Vanderloo, Jordan Hildenbrand, Heather Vestal, Paul Riordan, David Yanez, Reginald Lerebours, Kathy Niu","doi":"10.1007/s40596-025-02168-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The authors examined the effectiveness of an educational intervention aimed at improving psychiatry clerkship student clinical documentation skills.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>A 1-h didactic and \"gold standard\" sample writings of clinical documentation were provided to psychiatry clerkship medical students rotating on an academic consultation-liaison (CL) service between July 2022 and August 2023 (intervention group). A historical comparison group of medical students, rotating between January and June 2022, did not receive the intervention. Two examples of student documentation were collected, including note 1 (N1) during week 1 and note 2 (N2) during week 2. Note quality was assessed blindly using a standardized 100-point grading rubric.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty psychiatry clerkship students provided 60 examples of clinical documentation. There were no differences between N1 scores between groups. N2 mean scores were significantly greater in the intervention group over the comparison (77.4% vs 65.56%, p = 0.02). While all groups demonstrated improvement between N1 and N2, intervention groups improved significantly more than the comparison group (3.11 vs 11.7, p < 0.01). Improvements were observed most in the history of present illness, family-social history, and review of systems sub-sections. Time of year, a proxy for student experience, did not impact note scores.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Providing medical students with a didactic and examples of clinical documentation improved medical student documentation on the psychiatry clerkship.</p>","PeriodicalId":7069,"journal":{"name":"Academic Psychiatry","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Academic Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40596-025-02168-w","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: The authors examined the effectiveness of an educational intervention aimed at improving psychiatry clerkship student clinical documentation skills.
Method: A 1-h didactic and "gold standard" sample writings of clinical documentation were provided to psychiatry clerkship medical students rotating on an academic consultation-liaison (CL) service between July 2022 and August 2023 (intervention group). A historical comparison group of medical students, rotating between January and June 2022, did not receive the intervention. Two examples of student documentation were collected, including note 1 (N1) during week 1 and note 2 (N2) during week 2. Note quality was assessed blindly using a standardized 100-point grading rubric.
Results: Thirty psychiatry clerkship students provided 60 examples of clinical documentation. There were no differences between N1 scores between groups. N2 mean scores were significantly greater in the intervention group over the comparison (77.4% vs 65.56%, p = 0.02). While all groups demonstrated improvement between N1 and N2, intervention groups improved significantly more than the comparison group (3.11 vs 11.7, p < 0.01). Improvements were observed most in the history of present illness, family-social history, and review of systems sub-sections. Time of year, a proxy for student experience, did not impact note scores.
Conclusions: Providing medical students with a didactic and examples of clinical documentation improved medical student documentation on the psychiatry clerkship.
目的:作者考察了旨在提高精神病学见习学生临床记录技能的教育干预的有效性。方法:向2022年7月至2023年8月在学术咨询联络(CL)服务轮转的精神病学实习医学生(干预组)提供1小时的教学性和“金标准”临床文献样本。2022年1月至6月轮换的医学生历史对照组没有接受干预。收集了两个学生文件示例,包括第1周的注释1 (N1)和第2周的注释2 (N2)。使用标准化的100分评分标准盲目评估笔记质量。结果:30名精神病学见习学生提供了60份临床文献。各组间N1评分无显著差异。干预组N2平均评分明显高于对照组(77.4% vs 65.56%, p = 0.02)。虽然所有组在N1和N2之间均表现出改善,但干预组的改善显著高于对照组(3.11 vs 11.7, p)。结论:为医学生提供教学和临床文件示例改善了医学生对精神病学见习的记录。
期刊介绍:
Academic Psychiatry is the international journal of the American Association of Chairs of Departments of Psychiatry, American Association of Directors of Psychiatric Residency Training, Association for Academic Psychiatry, and Association of Directors of Medical Student Education in Psychiatry.
Academic Psychiatry publishes original, scholarly work in psychiatry and the behavioral sciences that focuses on innovative education, academic leadership, and advocacy.
The scope of the journal includes work that furthers knowledge and stimulates evidence-based advances in academic psychiatry in the following domains: education and training, leadership and administration, career and professional development, ethics and professionalism, and health and well-being.