Literature DB >> 17885319

Reliability of a 360-degree evaluation to assess resident competence.

Teresa L Massagli1, Jan D Carline.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine the feasibility and psychometric qualities of a 360-degree evaluation of physical medicine and rehabilitation (PM&R) residents' competence.
DESIGN: Nurses, allied health staff, and medical students completed a 12-item questionnaire after each PM&R resident rotation from January 2002 to December 2004. The items were derived from five of the six competencies defined by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME).
RESULTS: Nine hundred thirty evaluations of 56 residents were completed. The alpha reliability coefficient for the instrument was 0.89. Ratings did not vary significantly by resident gender. Senior residents had higher ratings than junior residents. A reliability of >0.8 could be achieved by ratings from just five nurses or allied health staff, compared with 23 ratings from medical students. Factor analysis revealed all items clustered on one factor, accounting for 84% of the variance. In a subgroup of residents with low scores, raters were able to differentiate among skills.
CONCLUSION: Resident assessment tools should be valid, reliable, and feasible. This Web-based 360-degree evaluation tool is a feasible way to obtain reliable ratings from rehabilitation staff about resident behaviors. The assignment of higher ratings for senior residents than junior residents is evidence for the general validity of this 360-degree evaluation tool in the assessment of resident performance. Different rater groups may need distinct instruments based on the exposure of rater groups to various resident activities and behaviors.

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17885319     DOI: 10.1097/PHM.0b013e318151ff5a

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Phys Med Rehabil        ISSN: 0894-9115            Impact factor:   2.159


  12 in total

1.  Education in professionalism: results from a survey of pediatric residency program directors.

Authors:  Jennifer C Kesselheim; Theodore C Sectish; Steven Joffe
Journal:  J Grad Med Educ       Date:  2012-03

2.  A randomized, controlled crossover study to discern the value of 360-degree versus traditional, faculty-only evaluation for performance improvement of anesthesiology residents.

Authors:  Jeffrey S Berger; Eric Pan; Jason Thomas
Journal:  J Educ Perioper Med       Date:  2009-07-01

3.  Feasibility of implementing a standardized multisource feedback program in the graduate medical education environment.

Authors:  Margaret Richmond; Colleen Canavan; Matthew C Holtman; Peter J Katsufrakis
Journal:  J Grad Med Educ       Date:  2011-12

4.  Evaluating Medical Student Communication/Professionalism Skills from a Patient's Perspective.

Authors:  Larry E Davis; Molly K King; Sharon J Wayne; Summers G Kalishman
Journal:  Front Neurol       Date:  2012-06-20       Impact factor: 4.003

Review 5.  The construct and criterion validity of the multi-source feedback process to assess physician performance: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Ahmed Al Ansari; Tyrone Donnon; Khalid Al Khalifa; Abdulla Darwish; Claudio Violato
Journal:  Adv Med Educ Pract       Date:  2014-02-27

6.  Reliability of the interprofessional collaborator assessment rubric (ICAR) in multi source feedback (MSF) with post-graduate medical residents.

Authors:  Mark F Hayward; Vernon Curran; Bryan Curtis; Henry Schulz; Sean Murphy
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2014-12-31       Impact factor: 2.463

7.  Usefulness of 360 degree evaluation in evaluating nursing students in Iran.

Authors:  Tabandeh Sadeghi; Marzeyeh Loripoor
Journal:  Korean J Med Educ       Date:  2016-02-25

8.  Design, implementation, and demographic differences of HEAL: a self-report health care leadership instrument.

Authors:  Kelly R Murphy; John E McManigle; Benjamin M Wildman-Tobriner; Amy Little Jones; Travis J Dekker; Barrett A Little; Joseph P Doty; Dean C Taylor
Journal:  J Healthc Leadersh       Date:  2016-10-20

9.  Assessment of first-year post-graduate residents: usefulness of multiple tools.

Authors:  Ying-Ying Yang; Fa-Yauh Lee; Hui-Chi Hsu; Chin-Chou Huang; Jaw-Wen Chen; Hao-Min Cheng; Wen-Shin Lee; Chiao-Lin Chuang; Ching-Chih Chang; Chia-Chang Huang
Journal:  J Chin Med Assoc       Date:  2011-11-25       Impact factor: 2.743

10.  Ratings of performance in multisource feedback: comparing performance theories of residents and nurses.

Authors:  Muhammad Tariq; Marjan Govaerts; Azam Afzal; Syed Ahsan Ali; Tabassum Zehra
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2020-10-12       Impact factor: 2.463

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.