{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0245253164556962, 'fraction_numerical': 0.011867088607594937, 'mean_word_length': 5.988950276243094, '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}}
Predicting Failing Performance on a Standardized Patient Clinical Performance Examination: The Importance of Communication and Professionalism Skills Deficits

Background The purpose is to determine which assessment measures identify medical students at risk of failing a clinical performance examination (CPX). Method Retrospective case-control, multiyear design, contingency table analysis, n = 149. Results We identified two predictors of CPX failure in patient–physician interaction skills: low clerkship ratings (odds ratio 1.79, P = .008) and student progress review for communication or professionalism concerns (odds ratio 2.64, P = .002). No assessments predicted CPX failure in clinical skills. Conclusions Performance concerns in communication and professionalism identify students at risk of failing the patient–physician interaction portion of a CPX. This correlation suggests that both faculty and standardized patients can detect noncognitive traits predictive of failing performance. Early identification of these students may allow for development of a structured supplemental curriculum with increased opportunities for practice and feedback. The lack of predictors in the clinical skills portion suggests limited faculty observation or feedback.