BACKGROUND: Self-assessment is an intricate component of continuing professional development and lifelong learning for health professionals. The agreement between self and external assessment for cognitive tasks in health professionals is reported to be poor; however, this topic has not been reviewed for technical tasks in surgery. OBJECTIVE: To compare self and external assessment for technical tasks in surgery. METHODS: MEDLINE, ERIC, and Google Scholar databases were searched for data from January 1960 to November 2011. Inclusion criteria were restricted to articles published in English in peer-reviewed journals, which reported on a comparison between self and external assessment for a technical task in a surgical specialty and involved medical students, surgical residents, surgical fellows, or practicing surgeons. Abstracts of identified articles were reviewed and pertinent full-text versions were retrieved. Manual searching of bibliographies for additional studies was performed. Data were extracted in a systematic manner. RESULTS: From a total of 49 citations, 17 studies (35%) were selected for review. Eight of the 17 studies (47%) reported no agreement, whereas 9 studies (53%) reported an agreement between self and external assessment for technical tasks in surgery. Four studies (24%) reported higher self versus external assessment scores, whereas 3 studies (18%) reported lower self versus external assessment scores. Sixteen studies (94%) focused on retrospective self-assessment and 1 study (6%) focused on predictive self-assessment. Agreement improved with higher levels of participant training; with high-quality, timely, and relevant feedback; and with postprocedure video review. CONCLUSIONS: This review demonstrated mixed results regarding an agreement between self and external assessment scores for technical tasks in surgery. Future investigations should attempt to improve the study design by accounting for differences between men and women, conducting paired and independent mean comparisons of self and external assessments, and ensuring that external assessments are valid and reliable.
BACKGROUND: Self-assessment is an intricate component of continuing professional development and lifelong learning for health professionals. The agreement between self and external assessment for cognitive tasks in health professionals is reported to be poor; however, this topic has not been reviewed for technical tasks in surgery. OBJECTIVE: To compare self and external assessment for technical tasks in surgery. METHODS: MEDLINE, ERIC, and Google Scholar databases were searched for data from January 1960 to November 2011. Inclusion criteria were restricted to articles published in English in peer-reviewed journals, which reported on a comparison between self and external assessment for a technical task in a surgical specialty and involved medical students, surgical residents, surgical fellows, or practicing surgeons. Abstracts of identified articles were reviewed and pertinent full-text versions were retrieved. Manual searching of bibliographies for additional studies was performed. Data were extracted in a systematic manner. RESULTS: From a total of 49 citations, 17 studies (35%) were selected for review. Eight of the 17 studies (47%) reported no agreement, whereas 9 studies (53%) reported an agreement between self and external assessment for technical tasks in surgery. Four studies (24%) reported higher self versus external assessment scores, whereas 3 studies (18%) reported lower self versus external assessment scores. Sixteen studies (94%) focused on retrospective self-assessment and 1 study (6%) focused on predictive self-assessment. Agreement improved with higher levels of participant training; with high-quality, timely, and relevant feedback; and with postprocedure video review. CONCLUSIONS: This review demonstrated mixed results regarding an agreement between self and external assessment scores for technical tasks in surgery. Future investigations should attempt to improve the study design by accounting for differences between men and women, conducting paired and independent mean comparisons of self and external assessments, and ensuring that external assessments are valid and reliable.
Authors: M Albanese; S Dottl; G Mejicano; L Zakowski; C Seibert; S Van Eyck; C Prucha Journal: Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract Date: 2006-08 Impact factor: 3.853
Authors: David A Davis; Paul E Mazmanian; Michael Fordis; R Van Harrison; Kevin E Thorpe; Laure Perrier Journal: JAMA Date: 2006-09-06 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Saba Balvardi; Koorosh Semsar-Kazerooni; Pepa Kaneva; Carmen Mueller; Melina Vassiliou; Mohammed Al Mahroos; Julio F Fiore; Kevin Schwartzman; Liane S Feldman Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2022-08-03 Impact factor: 3.453