Tyrone Donnon1, Ahmed Al Ansari, Samah Al Alawi, Claudio Violato. 1. Dr. Donnon is associate professor, Medical Education and Research Unit, Department of Community Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Dr. Al Ansari is director of training and development, Department of Medical Education, Faculty of Medicine, Bahrain Defense Force Hospital, Riffa, Bahrain. Dr. Al Alawi is a faculty member, Department of Family Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Bahrain Defense Force Hospital, Riffa, Bahrain. Dr. Violato is professor, Medical Education and Research Unit, Department of Community Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The use of multisource feedback (MSF) or 360-degree evaluation has become a recognized method of assessing physician performance in practice. The purpose of the present systematic review was to investigate the reliability, generalizability, validity, and feasibility of MSF for the assessment of physicians. METHOD: The authors searched the EMBASE, PsycINFO, MEDLINE, PubMed, and CINAHL databases for peer-reviewed, English-language articles published from 1975 to January, 2013. Studies were included if they met the follow ing inclusion criteria: used one or more MSF instruments to assess physician performance in practice; reported psychometric evidence of the instrument(s) in the form of reliability, generalizability coefficients, and construct or criterion-related validity; and provided information regarding the administration or feasibility of the process in collecting the feedback data. RESULTS: Of the 96 full-text articles assessed for eligibility, 43 articles were included. The use of MSF has been shown to be an effective method for providing feedback to physicians from a multitude of specialties about their clinical and nonclinical (i.e., professionalism, communication, interpersonal relationship, management) performance. In general, assessment of physician performance was based on the completion of the MSF instruments by 8 medical colleagues, 8 coworkers, and 25 patients to achieve adequate reliability and generalizability coefficients of α ≥ 0.90 and Ep ≥ 0.80, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The use of MSF employing medical colleagues, coworkers, and patients as a method to assess physicians in practice has been shown to have high reliability, validity, and feasibility.
PURPOSE: The use of multisource feedback (MSF) or 360-degree evaluation has become a recognized method of assessing physician performance in practice. The purpose of the present systematic review was to investigate the reliability, generalizability, validity, and feasibility of MSF for the assessment of physicians. METHOD: The authors searched the EMBASE, PsycINFO, MEDLINE, PubMed, and CINAHL databases for peer-reviewed, English-language articles published from 1975 to January, 2013. Studies were included if they met the follow ing inclusion criteria: used one or more MSF instruments to assess physician performance in practice; reported psychometric evidence of the instrument(s) in the form of reliability, generalizability coefficients, and construct or criterion-related validity; and provided information regarding the administration or feasibility of the process in collecting the feedback data. RESULTS: Of the 96 full-text articles assessed for eligibility, 43 articles were included. The use of MSF has been shown to be an effective method for providing feedback to physicians from a multitude of specialties about their clinical and nonclinical (i.e., professionalism, communication, interpersonal relationship, management) performance. In general, assessment of physician performance was based on the completion of the MSF instruments by 8 medical colleagues, 8 coworkers, and 25 patients to achieve adequate reliability and generalizability coefficients of α ≥ 0.90 and Ep ≥ 0.80, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The use of MSF employing medical colleagues, coworkers, and patients as a method to assess physicians in practice has been shown to have high reliability, validity, and feasibility.
Authors: Salman Y Guraya; Shaista S Guraya; Nehal Anam Mahabbat; Khulood Yahya Fallatah; Bashaer Ahmad Al-Ahmadi; Hadeel Hadi Alalawi Journal: J Clin Diagn Res Date: 2016-05-01
Authors: Susan Humphrey-Murto; Timothy J Wood; Shelly Ross; Walter Tavares; Brent Kvern; Ravi Sidhu; Joan Sargeant; Claire Touchie Journal: J Grad Med Educ Date: 2017-12
Authors: Joceline V Vu; Calista M Harbaugh; Ana C De Roo; Ben E Biesterveld; Paul G Gauger; Justin B Dimick; Gurjit Sandhu Journal: J Surg Educ Date: 2019-09-03 Impact factor: 2.891