In contrast to these prior works we sought to anchor our human evaluation in criteria more commonly used for evaluating the quality of physicians' expertise in history-taking, including their communication skills in consultation. We derived a framework from principles published in reviews of the consensus for best practices for patient-centered communication (PCCBP) in medical interviews [20], criteria examined for history-taking skills by the Royal College of Physicians in the UK as part of their Practical Assessment of Clinical Examination Skills (PACES)3[30], and criteria proposed by the UK General Medical Council Patient Questionnaire (GMCPQ)4 for doctors seeking patient feedback as part of professional re-validation5. We iterated upon these criteria to refine items for inclusion and derived pilot scales and instructions for assessment by using focus groups and interviews with clinicians and OSCE examiners based in the UK, Canada, US, and India. Our resulting pilot framework enabled assessment from two perspectives: clinician (board-certifiedphysicians) and lay raters (patient actors). The framework included consideration of consultation quality, structure and completeness, the roles, responsibilities, and skills of the interviewer (Tables A.1, A.2, A.3, and A.4).