This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePhoto ID display and professional attire
|
5 to >0.0 pts
Excellent
Photo ID is displayed. The student is dressed professionally.
|
0 pts
Poor
Photo ID is not displayed. Student must remedy this before grade is posted. The student is not dressed professionally.
|
|
5 pts
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeTime
|
5 to >3.0 pts
Excellent
The video does not exceed the 8-minute time limit.
|
3 to >0.0 pts
Good
The video exceeds the 8-minute time limit. (Note: Information presented after 8 minutes will not be evaluated for grade inclusion.)
|
|
|
|
5 pts
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDiscuss Subjective data:• Chief complaint• History of present illness (HPI)• Medications• Psychotherapy or previous psychiatric diagnosis• Pertinent histories and/or ROS
|
10 to >8.0 pts
Excellent
The video accurately and concisely presents the patient’s subjective complaint, history of present illness, medications, psychotherapy or previous psychiatric diagnosis, and pertinent histories and/or review of systems that would inform a differential diagnosis.
|
8 to >7.0 pts
Good
The video accurately presents the patient’s subjective complaint, history of present illness, medications, psychotherapy or previous psychiatric diagnosis, and pertinent histories and/or review of systems that would inform a differential diagnosis.
|
7 to >6.0 pts
Fair
The video presents the patient’s subjective complaint, history of present illness, medications, psychotherapy or previous psychiatric diagnosis, and pertinent histories and/or review of systems that would inform a differential diagnosis, but is somewhat vague or contains minor inaccuracies.
|
6 to >0 pts
Poor
The video presents an incomplete, inaccurate, or unnecessarily detailed/verbose description of the patient’s subjective complaint, history of present illness, medications, psychotherapy or previous psychiatric diagnosis, and pertinent histories and/or review of systems that would inform a differential diagnosis. Or subjective documentation is missing.
|
|
10 pts
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDiscuss Objective data:• Physical exam documentation of systems pertinent to the chief complaint, HPI, and history• Diagnostic results, including any labs, imaging, or other assessments needed to develop the differential diagnoses
|
10 to >8.0 pts
Excellent
The video accurately and concisely documents the patient’s physical exam for pertinent systems. Pertinent diagnostic tests and their results are documented, as applicable.
|
8 to >7.0 pts
Good
The response accurately documents the patient’s physical exam for pertinent systems. Diagnostic tests and their results are documented, as applicable.
|
7 to >6.0 pts
Fair
Documentation of the patient’s physical exam is somewhat vague or contains minor inaccuracies. Diagnostic tests and their results are documented but contain inaccuracies.
|
6 to >0 pts
Poor
The response provides incomplete, inaccurate, or unnecessarily detailed/verbose documentation of the patient’s physical exam. Systems may have been unnecessarily reviewed, or objective documentation is missing.
|
|
10 pts
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDiscuss results of Assessment:• Results of the mental status examination• Provide a minimum of three possible diagnoses in order of highest to lowest priority and explain why you chose them. What was your primary diagnosis and why? Describe how your primary diagnosis aligns with DSM-5 diagnostic criteria and is supported by the patient’s symptoms.
|
20 to >17.0 pts
Excellent
The video accurately documents the results of the mental status exam…. Video presents at least three differentials in order of priority for a differential diagnosis of the patient, and a rationale for their selection. Response justifies the primary diagnosis and how it aligns with DSM-5 criteria.
|
17 to >15.0 pts
Good
The video adequately documents the results of the mental status exam…. Video presents three differentials for the patient and a rationale for their selection. Response adequately justifies the primary diagnosis and how it aligns with DSM-5 criteria.
|
15 to >13.0 pts
Fair
The video presents the results of the mental status exam, with some vagueness or inaccuracy…. Video presents three differentials for the patient and a rationale for their selection. Response somewhat vaguely justifies the primary diagnosis and how it aligns with DSM-5 criteria.
|
13 to >0 pts
Poor
The response provides an incomplete, inaccurate, or unnecessarily detailed/verbose description of the results of the mental status exam and explanation of the differential diagnoses. Or assessment documentation is missing.
|
|
20 pts
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDiscuss treatment Plan:• A treatment plan for the patient that addresses psychotherapy and rationales including a plan for follow-up parameters and referrals
|
20 to >17.0 pts
Excellent
The video clearly and concisely outlines an evidence-based treatment plan for the patient that addresses treatment modality, psychotherapy choice with framework principles, and rationale. … Discussion includes a clear and concise follow-up plan and parameters…. The discussion includes a clear and concise referral plan.
|
17 to >15.0 pts
Good
The video clearly outlines an appropriate treatment plan without evidence-based discussion for the patient that addresses treatment modality, psychotherapy choice with framework principles, and rationale. … Discussion includes a clear follow-up plan and parameters…. The discussion includes a clear referral plan.
|
15 to >13.0 pts
Fair
The response somewhat vaguely or inaccurately outlines a treatment plan for the patient and provides a rationale for the treatment approaches recommended…. The discussion is somewhat vague or inaccurate regarding the follow-up plan and parameters…. The discussion is somewhat vague or inaccurate regarding a referral plan.
|
13 to >0 pts
Poor
The response does not address the treatment plan or the treatment plan is not appropriate for the assessment and the diagnosis or is missing elements of the treatment plan. … There is no discussion for follow-up and parameters. … There is no discussion of a referral plan.
|
|
20 pts
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePresentation style
|
5 to >4.0 pts
Excellent
Presentation style is exceptionally clear, professional, and focused.
|
4 to >3.5 pts
Good
Presentation style is clear, professional, and focused.
|
3.5 to >2.0 pts
Fair
Presentation style is mostly clear, professional, and focused.
|
2 to >0 pts
Poor
Presentation style is unclear, unprofessional, and/or unfocused.
|
|
5 pts
|
|
Total Points: 75
|
