Personal Characteristics of House Staff Candidates: A Quantitative Analysis of Relative Weights

Greganti, M. Andrew; McGaghie, William C.; Finn, William F.

doi:10.7326/0003-4819-97-1-108

Cited by 12 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, a number of studies in health care provide evidence that, in addition to skills and knowledge, certain personal characteristics contribute to successful clinical performance. 49,[57][58][59][60][61][62][63][64][65] Systematic development of a competent disaster medicine workforce requires first that worker competencies be defined and then validated. These competencies, then, could guide workforce development processes such as recruitment, assessment, selection and placement, training, and performance management.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Attributes of Effective Disaster Responders: Focus Group Discussions With Key Emergency Response Leaders

King¹,

North²,

Larkin³

et al. 2010

Disaster med. public health prep.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACTMethods: An effective disaster response requires competent responders and leaders. The purpose of this study was to ask experts to identify attributes that distinguish effective from ineffective responders and leaders in a disaster. In this qualitative study, focus groups were held with jurisdictional medical directors for the 9-1-1 emergency medical services systems of the majority of the nation's largest cities. These sessions were recorded with audio equipment and later transcribed.Results: The researchers identified themes within the transcriptions, created categories, and coded passages into these categories. Overall interrater reliability was excellent (κ = .8). The focus group transcripts yielded 138 codable passages. Ten categories were developed from analysis of the content: Incident Command System/Disaster Training/Experience, General Training/Experience, Teamwork/Interpersonal, Communication, Cognition, Problem Solving/Decision Making, Adaptable/Flexible, Calm/Cool, Character, and Performs Role. The contents of these categories included knowledge, skills, attitudes, behaviors, and personal characteristics.Conclusions: Experts in focus groups identified a variety of competencies for disaster responders and leaders. These competencies will require validation through further research that involves input from the disaster response community at large.(Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2010;4:332-338)

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Attributes of Effective Disaster Responders: Focus Group Discussions With Key Emergency Response Leaders

King¹,

North²,

Larkin³

et al. 2010

Disaster med. public health prep.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35] Noncognitive personality attributes are much more difficult to assess from the ERAS application, but may actually be more important to predicting professional success. 10,[34][35][36][37] The SLOR specifically addresses several of these noncognitive domains by asking that all candidates be ranked relative to their peers under "Qualification for EM" (i.e., commitment, work ethic, ability to develop an appropriate differential, personality). In addition, the written comments section was created to allow the author to expand upon select areas related to noncognitive attributes.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Council of Emergency Medicine Residency Directors' Standardized Letter of Recommendation: The Program Director's Perspective

Love

Smith

Weizberg

et al. 2014

Academic Emergency Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: The standardized letter of evaluation (SLOE) was created in 1997 to provide residency program directors (PDs) with a summative evaluation that incorporates normative grading (i.e., comparisons to peers applying to emergency medicine [EM] training). Although the standard letter of recommendation (SLOR) has become increasingly popular and important in decision-making, it has not been studied in the past 12 years. To assess the SLOR's effectiveness and limitations, the perspective of EM PDs was surveyed in this study.Methods: After validation of the questionnaire by 10 retired PDs, the survey was sent to the PD of each of the 159 EM residencies that existed at that time. The survey was circulated via the Council of Emergency Medicine Residency Directors' (CORD) listserv from January 24, 2013, to February 13, 2013. Weekly e-mail reminders to all PDs served to increase participation.Results: A total of 150 of 159 PDs (94.3%) completed the questionnaire. Nearly all respondents (149 of 150; 99.3%) agreed that the SLOR is an important evaluative tool and should continue to be used. In the application process, 91 of 150 (60.7%) programs require one or more SLORs, and an additional 55 (36.7%) recommend but do not require a SLOR to be considered for interview. When asked to identify the top three factors in deciding who should be interviewed, the SLOR was ranked first (139 of 150; 92.7%), with EM rotation grades ranked second (73 of 150; 48.7%). The factors that were most often identified as the top three that diminish the value of the SLOR in order were 1) "inflated evaluations" (121 of 146; 82.9%), 2) "inconsistency between comments and grades" (106 of 146; 72.6%), and 3) "inadequate perspective on candidate attributes in the written comments" and "inexperienced authors" (60 of 146; 41.1% each). Conclusions:The SLOR appears to be the most important tool in the EM PD's armamentarium for determining which candidates should be interviewed for residency training. Although valuable, the SLOR's potential utility is hampered by a number of factors, the most important of which is inflated evaluations. Focused changes in the SLOR template should be mindful that it appears, in general, to be successful in its intended purpose.ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE 2014;21:680-687 © 2014 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine P rior studies have shown that traditional narrative letters of recommendation (NLOR) suffer from a number of significant limitations. Such letters do not predict future performance.1,2 They often repeat cognitive merits of the applicant and do not specifically address noncognitive domains that may be more predictive of performance as a resident. 2,3 The information that is provided is not comparative and is often

show abstract

“…Previous reports would suggest each of these to be steps necessary to maximize the reliability of interview scores. 15,[21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][34][35][36] Our efforts appear to have been reasonably successful at achieving overall high internal consistency, because the alpha reliability for individual interviewers' overall scores was 0.86 and that for the four average interview scores was quite impressive at 0.83. One might also anticipate that by applying all of the above principles to ensure objective assessment and by having each interview team assess unique candidate attributes, the interrater reliabilities of interview scores generated by interviewers participating in the same interview would be higher than interrater reliabilities between interviews.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Similar approaches have been advocated by previous reports. 15,26,[34][35][36] The candidate factors were condensed into four domains: personal characteristics (PC), suitability for emergency medicine (EM), suitability for the specific residency training program (PR), and trainability (TR), each to be assessed by a separate interview team. These areas are similar to those assessed by other interview protocols reported in the literature.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most selection committees rely on an interview process to assess noncognitive factors, which may be as important as cognitive factors in predicting success in residency programs. [9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18] Interviews can be unstructured, semistructured, or structured. Attempts to add structure to the process either can focus on the actual administration of the interview using such techniques as panels of interviewers, standardized questions, prepared answers, and training for interviewers to use evaluation tools properly and reduce bias or can focus on the scoring instruments used.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Reliability of a Structured Interview Scoring Instrument for a Canadian Postgraduate Emergency Medicine Training Program

Bandıera¹,

Regehr

2004

Academic Emergency Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The reliability of the overall interview scores was very high. The intraclass correlations for each interviewer's VAS scores were also high, but interrater correlations within interview teams were moderate and not higher than those across interview teams. This study suggests that an interview assessment instrument can be highly reliable overall and that interviewers base scores on an overall global impression.

show abstract

Personal Characteristics of House Staff Candidates: A Quantitative Analysis of Relative Weights

Cited by 12 publications

References 6 publications

Attributes of Effective Disaster Responders: Focus Group Discussions With Key Emergency Response Leaders

Attributes of Effective Disaster Responders: Focus Group Discussions With Key Emergency Response Leaders

Council of Emergency Medicine Residency Directors' Standardized Letter of Recommendation: The Program Director's Perspective

Reliability of a Structured Interview Scoring Instrument for a Canadian Postgraduate Emergency Medicine Training Program

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About