Table 1 Experts' judgments of the importance of the QSF items.
From: Validity evidence and reliability of a simulated patient feedback instrument
No | Item | Mean | Standard deviation | Median | Item-total correlation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | SP: So, how do you think it went? | 3 | 1.11 | 3.25 | 0.23 |
2 | SP: So, what are some things you think you did well? | 3.36 | 1.08 | 3.72 | 0.28 |
3 | SP: Is there anything you would do or say differently, if you could do this again? | 3.36 | 0.93 | 3.63 | 0.65 |
4 | SP gave student adequate time to answer questions before continuing | 3.36 | 0.93 | 3.63 | 0.73 |
5 | SP first gave positive feedback | 3.14 | 1.13 | 3.63 | -0.13 |
6 | SP's positive feedback referred to specific changeable behaviours | 2.93 | 1.14 | 3.00 | 0.70 |
7 | SP gave feedback from patient's perspective | 3.86 | 0.53 | 3.96 | 0.22 |
8 | SP's negative feedback referred to specific changeable behaviours (feedback was not destructive) | 3.86 | 0.53 | 3.96 | 0.09 |
9 | SP limited the constructive feedback to 2 or fewer points | 2.86 | 1.13 | 2.38 | 0.33 |
10 | SP gave constructive feedback from patient's perspective | 3.86 | 0.53 | 3.96 | 0.22 |
11 | SP stopped feedback and acknowledged student's feelings | 2.79 | 1.12 | 2.36 | 0.30 |
12 | SP confirmed the feelings with student | 2.43 | 1.28 | 2.10 | 0.74 |
13 | SP reassured student about purpose of feedback | 3.14 | 1.03 | 3.63 | 0.60 |
14 | SP finished feedback on a positive note | 2.57 | 0.94 | 2.20 | 0.71 |
15 | SP asked student to summarize feedback given | 2.86 | 1.23 | 3.00 | 0.33 |
16 | The SP ensured that the student understood what she (the student) needed to work on | 2.79 | 1.31 | 3.00 | 0.36 |
17 | SP continued to ask student if she had questions until student said "no" | 2.79 | 1.12 | 2.36 | 0.43 |
18 | SP thanked the student | 2.43 | 1.09 | 2.13 | -0.18 |