Literature DB >> 21501218

Good questions, good answers: construct alignment improves the performance of workplace-based assessment scales.

Jim Crossley1, Gavin Johnson, Joe Booth, Winnie Wade.   

Abstract

CONTEXT: Assessment in the workplace is important, but many evaluations have shown that assessor agreement and discrimination are poor. Training discussions suggest that assessors find conventional scales invalid. We evaluate scales constructed to reflect developing clinical sophistication and independence in parallel with conventional scales.
METHODS: A valid scale should reduce assessor disagreement and increase assessor discrimination. We compare conventional and construct-aligned scales used in parallel to assess approximately 2000 medical trainees by each of three methods of workplace-based assessment (WBA): the mini-clinical evaluation exercise (mini-CEX); the acute care assessment tool (ACAT), and the case-based discussion (CBD). We evaluate how scores reflect assessor disagreement (V(j) and V(j*p) ) and assessor discrimination (V(p) ), and we model reliability using generalisability theory.
RESULTS: In all three cases the conventional scale gave a performance similar to that in previous evaluations, but the construct-aligned scales substantially reduced assessor disagreement and substantially increased assessor discrimination. Reliability modelling shows that, using the new scales, the number of assessors required to achieve a generalisability coefficient ≥0.70 fell from six to three for the mini-CEX, from eight to three for the CBD, from 10 to nine for 'on-take' ACAT, and from 30 to 12 for 'post-take' ACAT.
CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate that construct-aligned scales have greater utility, both because they are more reliable and because that reliability provides evidence of greater validity. There is also a wider implication: the disappointing reliability of existing WBA methods may reflect not assessors' differing assessments of performance, but, rather, different interpretations of poorly aligned scales. Scales aligned to the expertise of clinician-assessors and the developing independence of trainees may improve confidence in WBA. © Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2011.

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21501218     DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2010.03913.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Educ        ISSN: 0308-0110            Impact factor:   6.251


  32 in total

1.  Early feedback on the use of the internal medicine reporting milestones in assessment of resident performance.

Authors:  Eva Aagaard; Gregory C Kane; Lisa Conforti; Sarah Hood; Kelly J Caverzagie; Cynthia Smith; Davoren A Chick; Eric S Holmboe; William F Iobst
Journal:  J Grad Med Educ       Date:  2013-09

Review 2.  The modern surgeon and competency assessment: are the workplace-based assessments evidence-based?

Authors:  K M Torsney; D M Cocker; A A P Slesser
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 3.352

3.  Entrustment Ratings in Internal Medicine Training: Capturing Meaningful Supervision Decisions or Just Another Rating?

Authors:  Rose Hatala; Shiphra Ginsburg; Karen E Hauer; Andrea Gingerich
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2019-05       Impact factor: 5.128

4.  Comparing the Ottawa Emergency Department Shift Observation Tool (O-EDShOT) to the traditional daily encounter card: measuring the quality of documented assessments.

Authors:  Kaitlin Endres; Nancy Dudek; Meghan McConnell; Warren J Cheung
Journal:  CJEM       Date:  2021-01-29       Impact factor: 2.410

5.  Using the Entrustable Professional Activities Framework in the Assessment of Procedural Skills.

Authors:  Debra Pugh; Rodrigo B Cavalcanti; Samantha Halman; Irene W Y Ma; Maria Mylopoulos; David Shanks; Lynfa Stroud
Journal:  J Grad Med Educ       Date:  2017-04

6.  Proceed With Caution: Implementing Competency-Based Graduate Medical Education.

Authors:  M Douglas Jones; Tai M Lockspeiser
Journal:  J Grad Med Educ       Date:  2018-06

7.  Essential facets of competence that enable trust in graduates: a delphi study among physician educators in the Netherlands.

Authors:  Marjo Wijnen-Meijer; Marieke van der Schaaf; Kirstin Nillesen; Sigrid Harendza; Olle Ten Cate
Journal:  J Grad Med Educ       Date:  2013-03

Review 8.  Training in ERCP and EUS in the UK anno 2017.

Authors:  Noor Lh Bekkali; Gavin J Johnson
Journal:  Frontline Gastroenterol       Date:  2017-02-10

9.  Faculty and Resident Perspectives on Using Entrustment Anchors for Workplace-Based Assessment.

Authors:  Nancy Dudek; Wade Gofton; Janelle Rekman; Allan McDougall
Journal:  J Grad Med Educ       Date:  2019-06

10.  Preliminary Validity Evidence for a Milestones-Based Rating Scale for Chart-Stimulated Recall.

Authors:  Shalini T Reddy; Ara Tekian; Steven J Durning; Shanu Gupta; Justin Endo; Brenda Affinati; Yoon Soo Park
Journal:  J Grad Med Educ       Date:  2018-06
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.