Objectives:The purpose of this study was to explore residents' and assessors' perception of a new group assessment concept. Methods: This qualitative study consists of observations of four group assessment sessions, followed by semi-structured interviews with six residents and four assessors (specialists in internal medicine), who all volunteered to be interviewed. All residents at a medical department (eleven to fifteen each time) and four assessors participated in four group assessments, where the residents' clinical skills were assessed through case-based discussions. An external consultant (an anthropologist) performed the observations and the interviews. Notes from the observations and the interviews were analyzed using an inductive approach. Results: Eight of the ten interviewed participants preferred group assessment to individual assessment. Results from the interviews suggested that the group assessments were more consistent and that the level of discussion was perceived to be higher in the group discussions compared to the one-toone discussions. All residents indicated that they had acquired new knowledge during their assessment and reported having learned from listening to the assessment of their peers. Assessors similarly reported gaining new knowledge. Conclusions: The residents and assessors expressed very favourable attitudes toward the new group assessment concept. The assessment process was perceived to be higher in quality and more consistent, contributing to learning for all participating doctors in the department. Group assessment is feasible and acceptable, and provides a promising tool for assessment of clinical skills in the future.

Background Assessment of residents’ clinical skills using Case-based Discussion traditionally involves a one-to-one discussion with a supervisor. This entails a subjective, and maybe unequal, assessment of the resident, which can only be overcome with the use of multiple assessors. The purpose of this study was to explore residents’ and assessors’ perception of a group-assessment concept.Methods Eleven to fifteen residents in a medical department met 4 times (every 3rd month) over 1 year for 5 hours each time. The residents took turns presenting clinical cases within a predefined topic and discussed it with peers and assessors (diagnosis, differential diagnosis, ethical considerations etc.). Four assessors (specialists in internal medicine) participated in the discussion and together assessed the residents` clinical skills. An external consultant observed the group-assessment several times and conducted semi-structured interviews with the residents as well as the assessors. Notes from the observations and transcribed interviews were analyzed using an inductive approach looking for participants’ perceptions of the concept.Results Both residents and assessors preferred the group-assessment to the individual assessment. Since there were several assessors, the group-assessments were more consistent and regarded more resource-efficient and manageable than one-to-one assessments. The level of discussion was perceived to be higher in the group discussions compared to one-to-one discussions. All residents gained new knowledge during their assessment and in addition, also reported having learned from listening to the assessment of their peers. Assessors reported gaining new knowledge as well.Conclusions Group-assessment through Case-based Discussions is a good way to structure assessment of residents` clinical skills. The quality of the assessment process seems to be increased and is likely to be more objective than individual assessment. Group-assessment is feasible and acceptable, and additionally fosters learning for all participating doctors in the department.