How strong is the validity evidence behind communication assessment?
Dorrestein L, Ritter C, De Mol Z, et al. Validity evidence for communication skills assessment in health professions education: a scoping review. BMJ Open. 2025;15:e096799. PMID: 40912699.
View source on PubMed ↗What was studied?
This scoping review identified 146 studies involving 98,394 participants. Most studies were in human medicine and most participants were undergraduate learners. Performance-based simulated assessment was the dominant approach, including 68 OSCE-based studies.
What did the study find?
Internal-structure and content-related validity evidence were commonly reported. Evidence related to response processes and consequences was much less frequent. The studies also used diverse definitions, frameworks, rating scales and raters.
What might this mean for medical educators?
A communication assessment instrument should not be treated as 'validated' in the abstract. Validity relates to the intended interpretation and use of scores. Institutions need to be clear about what construct they are assessing, why the score is being generated, and whether the supporting evidence is appropriate for that use.
What does it not establish?
A scoping review maps the evidence base; it does not identify one best assessment tool. Heterogeneity in constructs and reporting also limits direct comparisons between methods.