Should we add patients in concordance of judgment learning tool panels? - An analysis between patients and primary care physicians

Abstract

Introduction The Concordance of Judgment Learning Tool (CJLT) has been developed for distance asynchronous learning of professionalism in health sciences education. The learning of professionalism is induced by a student’s comparison of their own responses with those of the panel members. Whilst CJLT programs typically include same profession experts in their panels, we believe that they could also include patients. Accordingly, we conducted a study aimed at comparing CJLT response patterns between two groups of primary care physicians (PCPs) and patients. Methods We conducted a mixed prospective study of responses to a CJLT program based on a group of PCPs and a group of patients: an analysis of the response patterns of the two groups and a qualitative analysis of justifications. Results A total of 110 participants were included in the study: 70 patients and 40 PCPs. We found a significant difference in response patterns between the PCP and patient groups for nine of the fifteen questions (60%). The qualitative analysis of justifications between groups allowed us to comprehend patients’ views on the professionalism of PCPs. Conclusions Including patients in CJLT panels can enrich the feedback offered to students in these online training programs.