{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01820633850303439, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0033715441672285905, 'mean_word_length': 5.396551724137931, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
How clinician examiners compare with simulated patients in assessing medical student empathy in a clinical exam setting

Abstract Background: Empathy is an important clinical attribute to be assessed during clinical examinations. While simulated patients (SPs) are well positioned to assess empathy in such settings, clinician-examiners are objective observers who are also experts in assessment. In this study, the assessments of student empathy from both examiners and SPs in clinical examinations were compared. Methods: The 10-item CARE measure were used for the assessment of empathy in 158 medical students in the Family Medicine specialty clerkship clinical competency test. The ratings from examiners and SPs were analyzed together with genders of students, examiners and patients, and the examination results. Results: SPs empathy ratings were higher than those from examiners across all ten items of CARE. A weak positive correlation was found between both ratings. Female SPs were more likely to give higher ratings, and examiners were more likely to give higher ratings to female students. SPs rating was moderately correlated with student examination score, while the correlation with examiners rating was strong. Conclusion: Although the inter-rater reliability was weak between the empathy rating from simulated patients and examiners, the evaluation of empathy from the patient’s perspective was seen to be more authentic as they are in interaction with the students.