{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.026380873866446827, 'fraction_numerical': 0.01236603462489695, 'mean_word_length': 5.491978609625669, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 1, '<?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}}
Reliability and Acceptance of the Mini-Clinical Evaluation Exercise as a Performance Assessment of Practicing Physicians

Background The purpose of this study was to evaluate the reliability and acceptance of the mini-Clinical Evaluation Exercise (mini-CEX) as an assessment of practicing primary care physicians. Method Six raters were recruited to conduct the assessments. After a training session, their ability to discriminate between levels of performance was evaluated using videotaped clinical scenarios. Fifteen physicians were assessed in an office setting by the raters who scored multiple clinical encounters using a validated mini-CEX form for each encounter. Participants were given a postassessment survey regarding the process. Results Raters distinguished between performance levels on the videotaped scenarios (P < .001). A total of 188 physician–patient interactions were assessed. The generalizability coefficient for 10 encounters was 0.92. In the postassessment survey, the raters (94%) and physicians assessed (75%) both felt that the mini-CEX is an acceptable assessment. Conclusions The mini-CEX seems to be a reliable and acceptable instrument for the assessment of practicing physicians.