BACKGROUND: The role of knowledge in postgraduate medical education has often been discussed. However, recent insights from cognitive psychology and the study of deliberate practice recognize that expert problem solving requires a well-organized knowledge database. This implies that postgraduate assessment should include knowledge testing. Longitudinal assessment, like progress testing, seems a promising approach for postgraduate progress knowledge assessment. AIMS: To evaluate the validity and reliability of a national progress test in postgraduate Obstetrics and Gynaecology training. METHODS: Data of 10 years of postgraduate progress testing were analyzed on reliability with Cronbach's alpha and on construct validity using one-way ANOVA with a post hoc Scheffe test. RESULTS: Average reliability with true-false questions was 0.50, which is moderate at best. After the introduction of multiple-choice questions average reliability improved to 0.65. Construct validity or discriminative power could only be demonstrated with some certainty between training year 1 and training year 2 and higher training years. CONCLUSION: Validity and reliability of the current progress test in postgraduate Obstetrics and Gynaecology training is unsatisfactory. Suggestions for improvement of both test construct and test content are provided.
BACKGROUND: The role of knowledge in postgraduate medical education has often been discussed. However, recent insights from cognitive psychology and the study of deliberate practice recognize that expert problem solving requires a well-organized knowledge database. This implies that postgraduate assessment should include knowledge testing. Longitudinal assessment, like progress testing, seems a promising approach for postgraduate progress knowledge assessment. AIMS: To evaluate the validity and reliability of a national progress test in postgraduate Obstetrics and Gynaecology training. METHODS: Data of 10 years of postgraduate progress testing were analyzed on reliability with Cronbach's alpha and on construct validity using one-way ANOVA with a post hoc Scheffe test. RESULTS: Average reliability with true-false questions was 0.50, which is moderate at best. After the introduction of multiple-choice questions average reliability improved to 0.65. Construct validity or discriminative power could only be demonstrated with some certainty between training year 1 and training year 2 and higher training years. CONCLUSION: Validity and reliability of the current progress test in postgraduate Obstetrics and Gynaecology training is unsatisfactory. Suggestions for improvement of both test construct and test content are provided.
Authors: D R Rutgers; J P J van Schaik; C L J J Kruitwagen; C Haaring; W van Lankeren; A F van Raamt; O Ten Cate Journal: Med Sci Educ Date: 2020-05-13
Authors: Stefan Wagener; Andreas Möltner; Sevgi Tımbıl; Maryna Gornostayeva; Jobst-Hendrik Schultz; Peter Brüstle; Daniela Mohr; Anna Vander Beken; Julian Better; Martin Fries; Marc Gottschalk; Janine Günther; Laura Herrmann; Christian Kreisel; Tobias Moczko; Claudius Illg; Adam Jassowicz; Andreas Müller; Moritz Niesert; Felix Strübing; Jana Jünger Journal: GMS Z Med Ausbild Date: 2015-10-15
Authors: D R Rutgers; F van Raamt; W van Lankeren; C J Ravesloot; A van der Gijp; Th J Ten Cate; J P J van Schaik Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2017-12-01 Impact factor: 5.315