Student perspectives on using egocentric video recorded by smart glasses to assess communicative and clinical skills with standardised patients

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Introduction: This exploratory study evaluated student perceptions of their ability to self- and peer assess (i) interpersonal communication skills and (ii) clinical procedures (a head and neck examination) during standardised patient (SP) interactions recorded by Google Glass compared to a static camera. Methods: Students compared the Google Glass and static camera recordings using an instrument consisting of 20 Likert-type items and four open- and closed-text items. The Likert-type items asked students to rate how effectively they could assess specific aspects of interpersonal communication and a head and neck examination in these two different types of recordings. The interpersonal communication items included verbal, paraverbal and non-verbal subscales. The open- and closed-text items asked students to report on more globally the differences between the two types of recordings. Descriptive and inferential statistical analyses were conducted for all survey items. An inductive thematic analysis was conducted to determine qualitative emergent themes from the open-text questions. Results: Students found the Glass videos more effective for assessing verbal (t22 = 2.091, P = 0.048) and paraverbal communication skills (t22 = 3.304, P = 0.003), whilst they reported that the static camera video was more effective for assessing non-verbal communication skills (t22 = -2.132, P = 0.044). Four principle themes emerged from the students' open-text responses comparing Glass to static camera recordings for self- and peer assessment: (1) first-person perspective, (2) assessment of non-verbal communication, (3) audiovisual experience and (4) student operation of Glass. Discussion and conclusion: Our findings suggest that students perceive that Google Glass is a valuable tool for facilitating self- and peer assessment of SP examinations because of students' perceived ability to emphasise and illustrate communicative and clinical activities from a first-person perspective.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalEuropean Journal of Dental Education
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Jan 1 2016

Fingerprint

Clinical Competence
Glass
video
Students
Communication
interpersonal communication
recording
student
communication skills
search engine
non-verbal communication
Aptitude
examination
Neck
Head
human being
ability

Keywords

  • Egocentric vision
  • Peer assessment
  • Self-assessment
  • Smart glasses
  • Standardised patients
  • Video review

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Dentistry(all)
  • Education

Cite this

@article{8a86afda80904c94a26e192a2420eb1d,
title = "Student perspectives on using egocentric video recorded by smart glasses to assess communicative and clinical skills with standardised patients",
abstract = "Introduction: This exploratory study evaluated student perceptions of their ability to self- and peer assess (i) interpersonal communication skills and (ii) clinical procedures (a head and neck examination) during standardised patient (SP) interactions recorded by Google Glass compared to a static camera. Methods: Students compared the Google Glass and static camera recordings using an instrument consisting of 20 Likert-type items and four open- and closed-text items. The Likert-type items asked students to rate how effectively they could assess specific aspects of interpersonal communication and a head and neck examination in these two different types of recordings. The interpersonal communication items included verbal, paraverbal and non-verbal subscales. The open- and closed-text items asked students to report on more globally the differences between the two types of recordings. Descriptive and inferential statistical analyses were conducted for all survey items. An inductive thematic analysis was conducted to determine qualitative emergent themes from the open-text questions. Results: Students found the Glass videos more effective for assessing verbal (t22 = 2.091, P = 0.048) and paraverbal communication skills (t22 = 3.304, P = 0.003), whilst they reported that the static camera video was more effective for assessing non-verbal communication skills (t22 = -2.132, P = 0.044). Four principle themes emerged from the students' open-text responses comparing Glass to static camera recordings for self- and peer assessment: (1) first-person perspective, (2) assessment of non-verbal communication, (3) audiovisual experience and (4) student operation of Glass. Discussion and conclusion: Our findings suggest that students perceive that Google Glass is a valuable tool for facilitating self- and peer assessment of SP examinations because of students' perceived ability to emphasise and illustrate communicative and clinical activities from a first-person perspective.",
keywords = "Egocentric vision, Peer assessment, Self-assessment, Smart glasses, Standardised patients, Video review",
author = "Zahl, {D. A.} and Stuart Schrader and Paul Edwards",
year = "2016",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/eje.12217",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "European Journal of Dental Education",
issn = "1396-5883",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Student perspectives on using egocentric video recorded by smart glasses to assess communicative and clinical skills with standardised patients

AU - Zahl, D. A.

AU - Schrader, Stuart

AU - Edwards, Paul

PY - 2016/1/1

Y1 - 2016/1/1

N2 - Introduction: This exploratory study evaluated student perceptions of their ability to self- and peer assess (i) interpersonal communication skills and (ii) clinical procedures (a head and neck examination) during standardised patient (SP) interactions recorded by Google Glass compared to a static camera. Methods: Students compared the Google Glass and static camera recordings using an instrument consisting of 20 Likert-type items and four open- and closed-text items. The Likert-type items asked students to rate how effectively they could assess specific aspects of interpersonal communication and a head and neck examination in these two different types of recordings. The interpersonal communication items included verbal, paraverbal and non-verbal subscales. The open- and closed-text items asked students to report on more globally the differences between the two types of recordings. Descriptive and inferential statistical analyses were conducted for all survey items. An inductive thematic analysis was conducted to determine qualitative emergent themes from the open-text questions. Results: Students found the Glass videos more effective for assessing verbal (t22 = 2.091, P = 0.048) and paraverbal communication skills (t22 = 3.304, P = 0.003), whilst they reported that the static camera video was more effective for assessing non-verbal communication skills (t22 = -2.132, P = 0.044). Four principle themes emerged from the students' open-text responses comparing Glass to static camera recordings for self- and peer assessment: (1) first-person perspective, (2) assessment of non-verbal communication, (3) audiovisual experience and (4) student operation of Glass. Discussion and conclusion: Our findings suggest that students perceive that Google Glass is a valuable tool for facilitating self- and peer assessment of SP examinations because of students' perceived ability to emphasise and illustrate communicative and clinical activities from a first-person perspective.

AB - Introduction: This exploratory study evaluated student perceptions of their ability to self- and peer assess (i) interpersonal communication skills and (ii) clinical procedures (a head and neck examination) during standardised patient (SP) interactions recorded by Google Glass compared to a static camera. Methods: Students compared the Google Glass and static camera recordings using an instrument consisting of 20 Likert-type items and four open- and closed-text items. The Likert-type items asked students to rate how effectively they could assess specific aspects of interpersonal communication and a head and neck examination in these two different types of recordings. The interpersonal communication items included verbal, paraverbal and non-verbal subscales. The open- and closed-text items asked students to report on more globally the differences between the two types of recordings. Descriptive and inferential statistical analyses were conducted for all survey items. An inductive thematic analysis was conducted to determine qualitative emergent themes from the open-text questions. Results: Students found the Glass videos more effective for assessing verbal (t22 = 2.091, P = 0.048) and paraverbal communication skills (t22 = 3.304, P = 0.003), whilst they reported that the static camera video was more effective for assessing non-verbal communication skills (t22 = -2.132, P = 0.044). Four principle themes emerged from the students' open-text responses comparing Glass to static camera recordings for self- and peer assessment: (1) first-person perspective, (2) assessment of non-verbal communication, (3) audiovisual experience and (4) student operation of Glass. Discussion and conclusion: Our findings suggest that students perceive that Google Glass is a valuable tool for facilitating self- and peer assessment of SP examinations because of students' perceived ability to emphasise and illustrate communicative and clinical activities from a first-person perspective.

KW - Egocentric vision

KW - Peer assessment

KW - Self-assessment

KW - Smart glasses

KW - Standardised patients

KW - Video review

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84978959452&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84978959452&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/eje.12217

DO - 10.1111/eje.12217

M3 - Article

C2 - 27380732

AN - SCOPUS:84978959452

JO - European Journal of Dental Education

JF - European Journal of Dental Education

SN - 1396-5883

ER -