Reproducibility of clinical performance assessment in practice using incognito standardized patients.

  • Gorter S
  • Rethans J
  • van der Heijde D
 et al. 
  • 4


    Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
  • N/A


    Citations of this article.


BACKGROUND: The reproducibility of authentic assessment methods has been investigated for objective structured clinical examinations (OSCEs) and video assessment in general practice, but not for assessment with incognito standardized patients. PURPOSE: To investigate the reproducibility of assessment with incognito standardized patients. METHODS: A total of 27 Dutch rheumatologists in 16 hospitals were each visited by 8 incognito standardized patients presenting with different rheumatological disorders. After each visit, the standardized patient completed a case-specific checklist containing items on medical history, physical examination and management. Over a 20-month period, 254 incognito visits took place, of which 201 were first visits. The standardized patient was detected by the rheumatologist in 2 cases only. These encounters were not included in the analysis. Generalizability theory was used to investigate the reproducibility of the assessment. RESULTS: One fifth of the variance can be attributed to variation between rheumatologists. The largest variance is due to the variation in difficulty among cases. A reproducible assessment requires 3 hours of testing time (6 cases) if it is obtained through a norm-referenced interpretation of scores and 7 hours of testing time (14 cases) if it is obtained through an absolute interpretation of scores. CONCLUSION: The reproducibility of performance assessment in clinical practice by incognito standardized patients is similar to that of other authentic measurements for the assessment of clinical competence and performance.

Get free article suggestions today

Mendeley saves you time finding and organizing research

Sign up here
Already have an account ?Sign in

Find this document


  • Simone Gorter

  • Jan-Joost Rethans

  • Desiree van der Heijde

  • Albert Scherpbier

  • Harry Houben

  • Cees van der Vleuten

Cite this document

Choose a citation style from the tabs below

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free