@article{KuehneFauthDestinaSevdeetal.2021,
  author    = {K{\"u}hne, Franziska and Fauth, Henriette and Destina Sevde, Ay-Bryson and Visser, Leonie N.C. and Weck, Florian},
  title     = {Communicating the diagnosis of cancer or depression: Results of a randomized controlled online study using video vignettes},
  series = {Cancer Medicine},
  volume    = {10},
  journal   = {Cancer Medicine},
  edition   = {24},
  publisher = {Wiley},
  address   = {Hoboken, New Jersey, USA},
  issn      = {2045-7634},
  doi       = {10.1002/cam4.4396},
  pages     = {9012 -- 9021},
  year      = {2021},
  abstract  = {Background Communicating a diagnosis is highly important, yet complex, especially in the context of cancer and mental disorders. The aim was to explore the communication style of an oncologist vs. psychotherapist in an online study. Methods Patients (N = 136: 65 cancer, 71 depression) were randomly assigned to watch a standardized video vignette with one of two communication styles (empathic vs. unempathic). Outcome measures of affectivity, information recall, communication skills, empathy and trust were applied. Results Regardless of diagnosis, empathic communication was associated with the perception of a significantly more empathic (p < 0.001, η2partial = 0.08) and trustworthy practitioner (p = 0.014, η2partial = 0.04) with better communication skills (p = 0.013, η2partial = 0.05). Cancer patients reported a larger decrease in positive affect (p < 0.001, η2partial = 0.15) and a larger increase in negative affect (p < 0.001, η2partial = 0.14) from pre- to post-video than depressive patients. Highly relevant information was recalled better in both groups (p < 0.001, d = 0.61-1.06). Conclusions The results highlight the importance of empathy while communicating both a diagnosis of cancer and a mental disorder. Further research should focus on the communication of a mental disorder in association with cancer.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{MaassKuehneHeinzeetal.2022,
  author    = {Maaß, Ulrike and K{\"u}hne, Franziska and Heinze, Peter Eric and Ay-Bryson, Destina Sevde and Weck, Florian},
  title     = {The concise measurement of clinical communication skills},
  series = {Frontiers in Psychiatry},
  volume    = {13},
  journal   = {Frontiers in Psychiatry},
  publisher = {Frontiers},
  address   = {Lausanne, Schweiz},
  issn      = {1664-0640},
  doi       = {10.3389/fpsyt.2022.977324},
  pages     = {10},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {Objective: There is a lack of brief rating scales for the reliable assessment of psychotherapeutic skills, which do not require intensive rater training and/or a high level of expertise. Thus, the objective is to validate a 14-item version of the Clinical Communication Skills Scale (CCSS-S). Methods: Using a sample of N = 690 video-based ratings of role-plays with simulated patients, we calculated a confirmatory factor analysis and an exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM), assessed convergent validities, determined inter-rater reliabilities and compared these with those who were either psychology students, advanced psychotherapy trainees, or experts. Results: Correlations with other competence rating scales were high (rs > 0.86-0.89). The intraclass correlations ranged between moderate and good [ICC(2,2) = 0.65-0.80], with student raters yielding the lowest scores. The one-factor model only marginally replicated the data, but the internal consistencies were excellent (α = 0.91-95). The ESEM yielded a two-factor solution (Collaboration and Structuring and Exploration Skills). Conclusion: The CCSS-S is a brief and valid rating scale that reliably assesses basic communication skills, which is particularly useful for psychotherapy training using standardized role-plays. To ensure good inter-rater reliabilities, it is still advisable to employ raters with at least some clinical experience. Future studies should further investigate the one- or two-factor structure of the instrument.},
  language  = {en}
}