Literature DB >> 17594220

Relationship between dean's letter rankings and later evaluations by residency program directors.

Stephen J Lurie1, David R Lambert, Tana A Grady-Weliky.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: It is not known how well dean's letter rankings predict later performance in residency.
PURPOSE: To assess the accuracy of dean's letter rankings to predict clinical performance in internship.
METHOD: Participants were medical students who graduated from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in the classes of 2003 and 2004. In their Dean's Letter, each student was ranked as either "Outstanding" (upper quartile), "Excellent" (second quartile), "Very good" (lower 2 quartiles), or "Good" (lowest few percentile). We compared these dean's letter rankings against results of questionnaires sent to program directors 9 months after graduation.
RESULTS: Response rate to the questionnaire was 58.9% (109 of 185 eligible graduates). There were no differences in response rate across the four dean's letter ranking categories. Program directors rated students in the top two categories of dean's letter rankings significantly higher than those in the very good group. Students in all three groups were rated significantly higher than those in the good group, F (3, 105) = 13.37, p < .001. Students in the very good group were most variable in their ratings by program directors, with many receiving similarly high ratings as students in the upper 2 groups. There were no differences by gender or specialty.
CONCLUSION: Dean's letter rankings are a significant predictor of later performance in internship among graduates of our medical school. Students in the bottom half of the class are most likely either to underperform or overperform in internship.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17594220     DOI: 10.1080/10401330701366523

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Teach Learn Med        ISSN: 1040-1334            Impact factor:   2.414


  6 in total

1.  Easing International Medical Graduates' Entry Into US Training.

Authors:  Fahad Saeed; Fahad Saeed Majeed; Muhammad Hassan Majeed; Nadia Kousar
Journal:  J Grad Med Educ       Date:  2011-06

Review 2.  Update in medical education 2007.

Authors:  Reena Karani; Kathel Dunn; Carol K Bates; Shobhina G Chheda
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2008-09-18       Impact factor: 5.128

3.  Ranking Practice Variability in the Medical Student Performance Evaluation: So Bad, It's "Good".

Authors:  Megan Boysen Osborn; James Mattson; Justin Yanuck; Craig Anderson; Ara Tekian; John Christian Fox; Ilene B Harris
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2016-11       Impact factor: 6.893

4.  Which Applicant Factors Predict Success in Emergency Medicine Training Programs? A Scoping Review.

Authors:  Allen Yang; Chris Gilani; Soheil Saadat; Linda Murphy; Shannon Toohey; Megan Boysen-Osborn
Journal:  AEM Educ Train       Date:  2020-01-08

5.  Relationship between peer assessment during medical school, dean's letter rankings, and ratings by internship directors.

Authors:  Stephen J Lurie; David R Lambert; Anne C Nofziger; Ronald M Epstein; Tana A Grady-Weliky
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 5.128

6.  Impact of the final adjective in the Medical Student Performance Evaluation on determination of applicant desirability.

Authors:  Mark A Ward; Debra L Palazzi; Martin I Lorin; Anoop Agrawal; Hilel Frankenthal; Teri L Turner
Journal:  Med Educ Online       Date:  2018-12
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.