P A Thomas1, K A Gebo, D B Hellmann. 1. Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To explore the utility of peer review (review by fellow interns or residents in the firm) as an additional method of evaluation in a university categorical internal medicine residency program. DESIGN/PARTICIPANTS: Senior residents and interns were asked to complete evaluations of interns at the end-of-month ward rotations. MAIN RESULTS: Response rates for senior residents evaluating 16 interns were 70%; for interns evaluating interns, 35%. Analysis of 177 instruments for 16 interns showed high internal consistency in the evaluations. Factor analysis supported a two-dimensional view of clinical competence. Correlations between faculty, senior resident, and intern assessments of interns were good, although varied by domain. CONCLUSIONS: An end-of-year attitude survey found that residents gave high ratings to the value of feedback from peers.
OBJECTIVE: To explore the utility of peer review (review by fellow interns or residents in the firm) as an additional method of evaluation in a university categorical internal medicine residency program. DESIGN/PARTICIPANTS: Senior residents and interns were asked to complete evaluations of interns at the end-of-month ward rotations. MAIN RESULTS: Response rates for senior residents evaluating 16 interns were 70%; for interns evaluating interns, 35%. Analysis of 177 instruments for 16 interns showed high internal consistency in the evaluations. Factor analysis supported a two-dimensional view of clinical competence. Correlations between faculty, senior resident, and intern assessments of interns were good, although varied by domain. CONCLUSIONS: An end-of-year attitude survey found that residents gave high ratings to the value of feedback from peers.
Authors: Lisa L Willett; Carlos A Estrada; Terry C Wall; Heather L Coley; Julius Ngu; William Curry; Amanda Salanitro; Thomas K Houston Journal: J Grad Med Educ Date: 2011-06