IntroductionOur ability to assess independent trainee performance is a key element of competency‐based medical education (CBME). In workplace‐based clinical settings, however, the performance of a trainee can be deeply entangled with others on the team. This presents a fundamental challenge, given the need to assess and entrust trainees based on the evolution of their independent clinical performance. The purpose of this study, therefore, was to understand what faculty members and senior postgraduate trainees believe constitutes independent performance in a variety of clinical specialty contexts.MethodsFollowing constructivist grounded theory, and using both purposive and theoretical sampling, we conducted individual interviews with 11 clinical teaching faculty members and 10 senior trainees (postgraduate year 4/5) across 12 postgraduate specialties. Constant comparative inductive analysis was conducted. Return of findings was also carried out using one‐to‐one sessions with key informants and public presentations.ResultsAlthough some independent performances were described, participants spoke mostly about the exceptions to and disclaimers about these, elaborating their sense of the interdependence of trainee performances. Our analysis of these interdependence patterns identified multiple configurations of coupling, with the dominant being coupling of trainee and supervisor performance. We consider how the concept of coupling could advance workplace‐based assessment efforts by supporting models that account for the collective dimensions of clinical performance.ConclusionThese findings call into question the assumption of independent performance, and offer an important step toward measuring coupled performance. An understanding of coupling can help both to better distinguish independent and interdependent performances, and to consider revising workplace‐based assessment approaches for CBME.

Peer assessment and feedback can be used to gauge PE reliability and promote learning. Teachers using these OSCEs must use methodology which fits their purpose. Competency-based education calls for diversification of assessment practices and asks how assessment impacts learning; the peer-based OSCE responds to these demands and will become an important practice in health professions education.

The identified TCs offer important insights into the relationship between trainee actions and how they conceptualise practice. At their heart, many appeared to represent ideals of practice that trainees should incorporate into their developing identities as they explore what it means to be a physician. Future research should explore how to incorporate TCs into assessment and the support of trainee development.

Assessment and evaluation of trainees’ clinical performance measures is needed to ensure safe, high-quality patient care. These measures also aid in the development of reflective, high-performing clinicians and hold graduate medical education (GME) accountable to the public. Although clinical performance measures hold great potential, challenges of defining, extracting, and measuring clinical performance in this way hinder their use for educational and quality improvement purposes. This article provides a way forward by identifying and articulating how clinical performance measures can be used to enhance GME by linking educational objectives with relevant clinical outcomes. The authors explore four key challenges: defining as well as measuring clinical performance measures, using electronic health record and clinical registry data to capture clinical performance, and bridging silos of medical education and health care quality improvement. The authors also propose solutions to showcase the value of clinical performance measures and conclude with a research and implementation agenda. Developing a common taxonomy of uniform specialty-specific clinical performance measures, linking these measures to large-scale GME databases, and applying both quantitative and qualitative methods to create a rich understanding of how GME affects quality of care and patient outcomes is important, the authors argue. The focus of this article is primarily GME, yet similar challenges and solutions will be applicable to other areas of medical and health professions education as well.