CONTEXT: Achieving competence in 'practice-based learning' implies that doctors can accurately self- assess their clinical skills to identify behaviours that need improvement. This study examines the impact of receiving feedback via performance benchmarks on medical students' self-assessment after a clinical performance examination (CPX). METHODS: The authors developed a practice-based learning exercise at 3 institutions following a required 8-station CPX for medical students at the end of Year 3. Standardised patients (SPs) scored students after each station using checklists developed by experts. Students assessed their own performance immediately after the CPX (Phase 1). One month later, students watched their videotaped performance and reassessed (Phase 2). Some students received performance benchmarks (their scores, plus normative class data) before the video review. Pearson's correlations between self-ratings and SP ratings were calculated for overall performance and specific skill areas (history taking, physical examination, doctor-patient communication) for Phase 1 and Phase 2. The 2 correlations were then compared for each student group (i.e. those who received and those who did not receive feedback). RESULTS: A total of 280 students completed both study phases. Mean CPX scores ranged from 51% to 71% of items correct overall and for each skill area. Phase 1 self-assessment correlated weakly with SP ratings of student performance (r = 0.01-0.16). Without feedback, Phase 2 correlations remained weak (r = 0.13-0.18; n = 109). With feedback, Phase 2 correlations improved significantly (r = 0.26-0.47; n = 171). Low-performing students showed the greatest improvement after receiving feedback. CONCLUSIONS: The accuracy of student self-assessment was poor after a CPX, but improved significantly with performance feedback (scores and benchmarks). Videotape review alone (without feedback) did not improve self-assessment accuracy. Practice-based learning exercises that incorporate feedback to medical students hold promise to improve self-assessment skills.
CONTEXT: Achieving competence in 'practice-based learning' implies that doctors can accurately self- assess their clinical skills to identify behaviours that need improvement. This study examines the impact of receiving feedback via performance benchmarks on medical students' self-assessment after a clinical performance examination (CPX). METHODS: The authors developed a practice-based learning exercise at 3 institutions following a required 8-station CPX for medical students at the end of Year 3. Standardised patients (SPs) scored students after each station using checklists developed by experts. Students assessed their own performance immediately after the CPX (Phase 1). One month later, students watched their videotaped performance and reassessed (Phase 2). Some students received performance benchmarks (their scores, plus normative class data) before the video review. Pearson's correlations between self-ratings and SP ratings were calculated for overall performance and specific skill areas (history taking, physical examination, doctor-patient communication) for Phase 1 and Phase 2. The 2 correlations were then compared for each student group (i.e. those who received and those who did not receive feedback). RESULTS: A total of 280 students completed both study phases. Mean CPX scores ranged from 51% to 71% of items correct overall and for each skill area. Phase 1 self-assessment correlated weakly with SP ratings of student performance (r = 0.01-0.16). Without feedback, Phase 2 correlations remained weak (r = 0.13-0.18; n = 109). With feedback, Phase 2 correlations improved significantly (r = 0.26-0.47; n = 171). Low-performing students showed the greatest improvement after receiving feedback. CONCLUSIONS: The accuracy of student self-assessment was poor after a CPX, but improved significantly with performance feedback (scores and benchmarks). Videotape review alone (without feedback) did not improve self-assessment accuracy. Practice-based learning exercises that incorporate feedback to medical students hold promise to improve self-assessment skills.
Authors: Leigh A Baumgart; Ellen J Bass; Jason A Lyman; Sherry Springs; John Voss; Gregory F Hayden; Martha A Hellems; Tracey R Hoke; Katharine A Schlag; John B Schorling Journal: Proc Hum Factors Ergon Soc Annu Meet Date: 2010-01-01
Authors: Emine Ercikan Abali; Hanin Rashid; H Liesel Copeland; Melissa Calt; Richard DeMaio; Jashvin Patel; Sam Schild; Sangita Phadtare; Louis Chai; Michael Ullo Journal: Med Sci Educ Date: 2020-04-06
Authors: Su-Ting T Li; Daniel J Tancredi; Ann E Burke; Ann Guillot; Susan Guralnick; R Franklin Trimm; John D Mahan Journal: J Grad Med Educ Date: 2012-12
Authors: David A Cook; Denise M Dupras; Thomas J Beckman; Kris G Thomas; V Shane Pankratz Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2008-11-11 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Simon Buczacki; Joseph Shalhoub; Peter M George; Laura M Vearncombe; Patrick D Byrne; William Alazawi Journal: JRSM Short Rep Date: 2011-08-17
Authors: Ester H A J Coolen; Jos M T Draaisma; Marije Hogeveen; Tim A J Antonius; Charlotte M L Lommen; Jan L Loeffen Journal: Int J Pediatr Date: 2012-02-22