Danielle Blanch-Hartigan1. 1. Department of Psychology, Northeastern University, Boston, MA 02115, USA. Blanch.d@husky.neu.edu
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Self-assessment is an important component of medical education. Meta-analyses were conducted to better understand accuracy of self-assessment and direction of inaccuracy. METHODS: Three meta-analyses were conducted on results from 35 published articles on medical student self-assessment, one for each of the theoretically distinct ways of measuring accuracy of self-reported ability (correlational, paired comparison, and independent means comparison). Characteristics that potentially influence self-assessment accuracy, including gender, year in medical school, and type of self-assessment, were examined. RESULTS: Students are moderately able to self-assess performance and are more accurate later in medical school. Students as a whole do not significantly over- or underestimate, but are more likely to overestimate on communication-based, standardized patient encounters than objective, knowledge-based performance measures. Female students underestimate their performance more than male students, but gender analyses are often unreported. CONCLUSION: A deeper understanding of the causes and consequences of over- and underestimation is impossible without measurement and reporting of the direction of inaccuracy. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: To improve our understanding of self-assessment and increase its effectiveness as a teaching tool, research should report self-assessment as both a correlation and a paired comparison, and conduct analyses of important moderators that can influence self-assessment accuracy.
OBJECTIVE: Self-assessment is an important component of medical education. Meta-analyses were conducted to better understand accuracy of self-assessment and direction of inaccuracy. METHODS: Three meta-analyses were conducted on results from 35 published articles on medical student self-assessment, one for each of the theoretically distinct ways of measuring accuracy of self-reported ability (correlational, paired comparison, and independent means comparison). Characteristics that potentially influence self-assessment accuracy, including gender, year in medical school, and type of self-assessment, were examined. RESULTS: Students are moderately able to self-assess performance and are more accurate later in medical school. Students as a whole do not significantly over- or underestimate, but are more likely to overestimate on communication-based, standardized patient encounters than objective, knowledge-based performance measures. Female students underestimate their performance more than male students, but gender analyses are often unreported. CONCLUSION: A deeper understanding of the causes and consequences of over- and underestimation is impossible without measurement and reporting of the direction of inaccuracy. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: To improve our understanding of self-assessment and increase its effectiveness as a teaching tool, research should report self-assessment as both a correlation and a paired comparison, and conduct analyses of important moderators that can influence self-assessment accuracy.
Authors: Antoinette C Spoto-Cannons; Deanna M Isom; Max Feldman; Kira K Zwygart; Rahul Mhaskar; Marna Rayl Greenberg Journal: Adv Med Educ Pract Date: 2019-09-26
Authors: Paul Kukulski; James Ahn; Christine Babcock; Navneet Cheema; Galeta C Clayton; Adriana S Olson; Nathan Olson; Karis L Tekwani; Keme Carter Journal: AEM Educ Train Date: 2021-02-19
Authors: Katherine Gavinski; Erin Cleveland; Aashish K Didwania; Joseph M Feinglass; Melanie S Sulistio Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2020-09-28 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Iliana C Lega; Husam Abdel-Qadir; Vaidehi Misra; Frozan Safi; Kathryn A Brewerton; Wei Wu; Robin Mason; An-Wen Chan; Paula A Rochon Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2021-07-14 Impact factor: 2.692