Assessing and Documenting General Competencies in Otolaryngology Resident Training Programs

Roark, Rick M.; Schaefer, Steven David; Yu, Guo‐Pei; Branovan, Daniel I.; Peterson, Stephen J.; Lee, Wei-Nchih

doi:10.1097/01.mlg.0000205148.14269.09

Cited by 14 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…2 Between 2002 and 2007, complex and customized tools have been used with varying success in cardiothoracic surgery, 3 otolaryngology, 4 general surgery, 5 physical medicine and rehabilitation, 6,7 radiology, 8 and internal medicine 9 residency programs. However, 1 study of trauma residents concluded that the 360-degree evaluation provided limited new information with increased work for little return.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

From the eye of the nurses: 360-degree evaluation of residents

Ogunyemi

González

Fong

et al. 2009

Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

From the eye of the nurses: 360-degree evaluation of residents

Ogunyemi

González

Fong

et al. 2009

Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Six studies provided no psychometric data (Willoughby et al 1979;Alagna & Reddy 1985;Amato & Novales-Castro 2009;Chen et al 2009;Nofziger et al 2010;Perera et al 2010). Only a few studies (Cottrell et al 2006;Roark et al 2006;O'Brien et al 2008) described the concept of content validity: the extent to which the domain of interest was sampled comprehensively by the items in the questionnaire (Terwee et al 2007). This content validity was usually explained referring to existing literature or frameworks.…”

Section: Psychometric Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Criterion validity, frequently mentioned in Table 2, refers to the relationship linking the attributes in a tool with the performance on a criterion, whereas predictive validity (Linn et al 1976;Arnold et al 1981;Dijcks et al 2003;Lurie et al 2007) indicates the degree to which test scores predict performance on some future criterion and convergent validity (Lurie et al 2006a) the extent to which different measures of the same construct correlate with one other (DeVon et al 2007). Although no single criterion or gold standard will ever be perfect (Norman et al 1996), usually, faculty ratings are considered to be the gold standard in educational settings (Lin et al 1975;van Rosendaal & Jennett 1994;Davis 2002;Dijcks et al 2003;Bryan et al 2005;Roark et al 2006). Construct validity refers to the extent to which scores on a particular questionnaire relate to other measures in a manner that is consistent with theoretically derived hypotheses concerning the concepts that are being measured (Terwee et al 2007).…”

Section: Psychometric Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reliability and validity of student peer assessment in medical education: A systematic review

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Peer assessment has been demonstrated to be an effective educational intervention for health science students. Aims: This study aims to give an overview of all instruments or questionnaires for peer assessments used in medical and allied health professional educational settings and their psychometric characteristics as described in literature. Methods: A systematic literature search was carried out using the electronic databases Pubmed, Embase, ERIC, PsycINFO and Web of Science, including all available inclusion dates up to May 2010. Results: Out of 2899 hits, 28 studies were included, describing 22 different instruments for peer assessment in mainly medical educational settings. Although most studies considered professional behaviour as a main subject of assessment and described peer assessment usually as an assessment tool, great diversity was found in educational settings and application of peer assessment, dimensions or constructs as well as number of items and scoring system per questionnaire, and in psychometric characteristics. Conclusions: Although quite a few instruments of peer assessment have been identified, many questionnaires did not provide sufficient psychometric data. Still, the final choice of an instrument for educational purposes can only be justified by its sufficient reliability and validity as well as the discriminative and evaluative purposes of the assessment.

show abstract

“…We found 12 articles that described assessment tools used to measure care-management as part of the general evaluation of trainees’ ACGME or CanMEDS competencies 28–37. In the majority of these studies, new assessment tools were developed or previously known ones modified for this purpose 29–32,34–36,38.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating medical residents as managers of care: a critical appraisal of assessment methods

Busari¹,

Stammen²,

Gennissen³

et al. 2014

AMEP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionThe increasing demands for effective and efficient health care delivery systems worldwide have resulted in an expansion of the desired competencies that physicians need to possess upon graduation. Presently, medical residents require additional professional competencies that can prepare them to practice adequately in a continuously changing health care environment. Recent studies show that despite the importance of competency-based training, the development and evaluation of management competencies in residents during residency training is inadequate. The aim of this literature review was to find out which assessment methods are currently being used to evaluate trainees’ management competencies and which, if any, of these methods make use of valid and reliable instruments.MethodsIn September 2012, a thorough search of the literature was performed using the PubMed, Cochrane, Embase®, MEDLINE®, and ERIC databases. Additional searches included scanning the references of relevant articles and sifting through the “related topics” displayed by the databases.ResultsA total of 25 out of 178 articles were selected for final review. Four broad categories emerged after analysis that best reflected their content: 1) measurement tools used to evaluate the effect of implemented curricular interventions; 2) measurement tools based on recommendations from consensus surveys or conventions; 3) measurement tools for assessing general competencies, which included care-management; and 4) measurement tools focusing exclusively on care-management competencies.ConclusionLittle information was found about (validated) assessment tools being used to measure care-management competence in practice. Our findings suggest that a combination of assessment tools should be used when evaluating residents’ care-management competencies.

show abstract

Assessing and Documenting General Competencies in Otolaryngology Resident Training Programs

Cited by 14 publications

References 15 publications

From the eye of the nurses: 360-degree evaluation of residents

From the eye of the nurses: 360-degree evaluation of residents

Reliability and validity of student peer assessment in medical education: A systematic review

Evaluating medical residents as managers of care: a critical appraisal of assessment methods

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About