Psych assessment report writing errors....

[Resident92]

I work for an agency and I am the only psychologist on staff with a bunch of Social Worker's in charge. I do testing and assessment 3 days per week. Besides that I have a client case load. I try to tell them it takes time to score, interpret and write reports. They don't get it because they don't even know how to do it. I have to shuck these things out quickly. I am finding that I turn them over and then catch stupid typos after the fact and it really frustrates the hell out of me and makes me feel like a jerk.

Anyone either been there or experience this? I am not sure what to do. Now I have reports floating around written by me with stupid writing errors..

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[erg923]

I would never agree to a turn-around timeline which precluded time for proofing after a report has been finished.

 

[WisNeuro]

My deadline is 2 weeks.

 

[Resident92]

I would never agree to a turn-around timeline which precluded time for proofing after a report has been finished.

I do proof them, it is just the pace that I am required to keep. It is a burnout factor. Certainly an over demanding pace...

 

[Pragma]

I do proof them, it is just the pace that I am required to keep. It is a burnout factor. Certainly an over demanding pace...

Proof and have someone else proof I guess. The way the world works, you have to turn out good reports without typos. Sometimes that means that you might have to glance over your report after dinner or in the AM with your coffee before you go to work. Your job to do. Errors aren't really acceptable, and I notice that some newer generation students seem to think they should be. I also notice errors in medical records all the time from other professions (e.g., MDs, nurses), but our reports are both qualitatively and quantitatively different than theirs.

 

[Resident92]

Proof and have someone else proof I guess. The way the world works, you have to turn out good reports without typos. Sometimes that means that you might have to glance over your report after dinner or in the AM with your coffee before you go to work. Your job to do. Errors aren't really acceptable, and I notice that some newer generation students seem to think they should be. I also notice errors in medical records all the time from other professions (e.g., MDs, nurses), but our reports are both qualitatively and quantitatively different than theirs.

I agree

 

[AcronymAllergy]

Possibly look into dictation software? Might save you some time on the writing side that you can then devote to proofing the typos and "mis-hears" that are sure to happen on occasion.

Also, see if there are places in your reports that could be significantly pared down or done away with altogether. Lord knows, my reports are shorter now than they were in grad school (for the most part), and could likely be shorter still, particularly if I needed to pump them out more quickly.

That, or look at the referral source relative to your typical report, and potentially tailor the latter accordingly. I know of at least one individual with same-day turnaround on reports that they keep up by heavily slanting the report to address only what's relevant to answering the referral question (and anything that might be directly related to it).

Or would it perhaps be possible to provide verbal feedback to someone ahead of the written report, thereby buying you some extra writing time?

 

[docma]

Look at the referral source relative to your typical report, and potentially tailor the latter accordingly. ... address only what's relevant to answering the referral question (and anything that might be directly related to it).

In applied settings, reports should typically be concise and focused only on the referral question. Among the reasons testing has become less valued and less in use, I think, is that testing reports (especially now that they can be conflated by huge chunks of computer generated text that may be largely irrelevant to the specific case) is that other professionals don't find them targeted to their needs and actually useful.
A short, precise, concise timely report is most useful. It does take time and practice, practice, practice to write them--but it is way easier to catch the errors too.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

A short, precise, concise timely report is most useful. It does take time and practice, practice, practice to write them--but it is way easier to catch the errors too.

100% accurate.

Btw, dictation is asking for a headache if you are only doing short reports, as you are likely to have more errors in the beginning as the software learns your voice (human transcription can be just as flaky). I'd strongly recommend sticking with a concise style and phrasing. It may take more time up front, but eventually it becomes much easier.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

In applied settings, reports should typically be concise and focused only on the referral question. Among the reasons testing has become less valued and less in use, I think, is that testing reports (especially now that they can be conflated by huge chunks of computer generated text that may be largely irrelevant to the specific case) is that other professionals don't find them targeted to their needs and actually useful.
A short, precise, concise timely report is most useful. It does take time and practice, practice, practice to write them--but it is way easier to catch the errors too.

Very much agreed. Although I'd caution that we also need to A) educate referral sources as to what we can and can't say/answer, B) not back down from the answers we do provide when they aren't what the referral source wanted, and C) orient providers to the typical format and style of a psychological/neuropsychological report (after making the necessary changes and concessions mentioned above regarding brevity, precision, etc.).

A neuropsych report, for example, is generally not going to be akin to the one-paragraph blurb you'll often get that interprets an MRI, nor should it (in my opinion).

 

[Ollie123]

Far from an expert on this, but what I did for tests with computer scoring that produce relatively standardized (but ugly/chaotic) output was make an excel spreadsheet to parse and re-arrange things. One time re-typing everything into a more coherent order and realizing how error-prone and time consuming it was proved to be enough for me. Just copy/paste into sheet one and copy out the pretty version on sheet two. Occasionally needed to make edits if certain subtests weren't administered, etc. but overall worked pretty well. Probably more relevant if you are doing evals that include full WAIS/WJ/PAI/etc. as I was doing LD evals. Not sure how much time it would save if you are doing a bunch of briefer measures rather than a few large ones that have a boatload of indices/subtests that need to be included, but worth considering. The computer-generated reports are garbage but no reason not to take advantage of technology for things like formatting.