International Journal of Medical Education最新文献

Objectives: To measure intra-standard-setter variability and assess the variations between the pass marks obtained from Angoff ratings, guided by the latent trait theory as the theoretical model.

Methods: A non-experimental cross-sectional study was conducted to achieve the purpose of the study. Two knowledge-based tests were administered to 358 final-year medical students (223 females and 135 males) as part of their normal summative programme of assessments. The results of judgmental standard-setting using the Angoff method, which is widely used in medical schools, were used to determine intra-standard-setter inconsistency using the three-parameter item response theory (IRT). Permission for this study was granted by the local Research Ethics Committee of the University of Nottingham. To ensure anonymity and confidentiality, all identifiers at the student level were removed before the data were analysed.

Results: The results of this study confirm that the three-parameter IRT can be used to analyse the results of individual judgmental standard setters. Overall, standard-setters behaved fairly consistently in both tests. The mean Angoff ratings and conditional probability were strongly positively correlated, which is a matter of inter-standard-setter validity.

Conclusions: We recommend that assessment providers adopt the methodology used in this study to help determine inter and intra-judgmental inconsistencies across standard setters to minimise the number of false positive and false negative decisions.

Objectives: The current study sought to explain how different professional experiences led Singaporean psychiatrists to alter their clinical reasoning processes as their careers evolved from psychiatry residents to senior consultant psychiatrists.

Methods: The current qualitative study interviewed 26 clinicians at various stages of their psychiatric career, spanning residents to senior psychiatrists.  The authors used a constructivist grounded theory approach to structure the collection and analysis of data. Analyses produced a dense theoretical explanation rooted in the experiences of participants.

Results: Several differences emerged between the way psychiatry residents and senior psychiatrists explained their reasoning process and the experiences on which they based their preference. Residents preferred using deductive logic-driven frameworks that were diagnosis-centric, because of the pressures they experienced during their training and assessments. Senior psychiatrists emphasized a more holistic and problem-centric approach. Participants attributed the changes that occurred over time to practical experiences, such as their greater clinical responsibility and independence, and individual experiences, such as growing sensitivity to the clinical reasoning process or their growing propensity for professional reflectiveness. These changes manifest as an increase in repertoire and flexibility in deployment of different clinical reasoning strategies.

Conclusions: It is important for trainees to be aware of the deductive and inductive modes of clinical reasoning during supervision and to be comfortable with shifting clinical focus from diagnoses to specific individual problems. Training programs should provide and plan adequate longitudinal clinical exposure to develop clinical reasoning abilities in a way that allows consequences of decisions to be explored. Continued faculty development to ease the diversification of clinical reasoning skills should be encouraged, as should reflectivity in the learners during clinical supervision.

Objectives: This study explores a method of transferring a post graduate medical education curriculum internationally and contextualising it to the local environment. This paper also explores the experiences of those local medical educationalists involved in the process.

Methods: Several methods were implemented. Firstly, a modified Delphi process for the contextualisation of learning outcomes was implemented with a purposefully sampled expert group of Malaysian Family Medicine Specialists. Secondly a small group review for supporting materials was undertaken. Finally, qualitative data in relation to the family medicine specialists' experiences of the processes was collected via online questionnaire and analysed via template analysis. Descriptive statistics were used.

Results: Learning outcomes were reviewed over three rounds; 95.9% (1691/1763) of the learning outcomes were accepted without modification, with the remainder requiring additions, modifications, or deletions. Supporting materials were extensively altered by the expert group. Template analysis showed that Family Medicine Specialists related positively to their involvement in the process, commenting on the amount of similarity in the medical curriculum whilst recognising differences in disease profiles and cultural approaches.

Conclusions: Learning outcomes and associated material were transferable between "home" and "host" institution. Where differences were discovered this novel approach places "host" practitioners' experiences and knowledge central to the adaptation process, thereby rendering a fit for purpose curriculum. Host satisfaction with the outcome of the processes, as well as ancillary benefits were clearly identified.

Objectives: Determine how a shift- based schedule to accommodate more students affects learning, performance, and satisfaction with the Obstetrics and Gynecology (OBG) rotation.

Methods: The study was conducted among third year OBG medical students with a triangular convergent cross-sectional approach. A new shift-based schedule was implemented. After each rotation, an online survey was conducted using a convenience sampling. Student scores on the National Board of Medical Examiner (NBME) OBG subject exam were analyzed using paired t test. Survey data was analyzed using two sample t test. The relationship between survey responses and exam score findings were described. Data from shift-schedule students was compared to traditional schedule students from the prior academic year.

Results: A statistically significant improvement was seen for average NBME score for shift-schedule students during the beginning portion (groups 1-3) of the academic year (M=80, SD=6.9) compared to traditional (M=75.7, SD=7.3) [t ₍₁₄₅₎ =3.69, p =.001]. A similar pattern was not seen in subsequent groups (groups 4-6). Shift-schedule students also showed a statistically significant improvement in their perception of learning (t ₍₁₈₃₎ =-2.54, p =.012). Parallel results were seen for belonging, manageable workload, time to study, and engaging meaningfully. Using this model, we increased rotation capacity from 24 to 30 students per group (20%).

Conclusions: Shift based scheduling allows 20% increase in capacity. Exam scores and student learning outcomes were similar or better than traditional schedule controls.