“勾”?一个新的基于结果的研究生课程能否利用程序性评估减轻重症医学的评估负担?

IF 2.1 Q3 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE Journal of the Intensive Care Society Pub Date : 2023-05-01 DOI:10.1177/17511437211061642
Christopher Smith, Mumtaz Patel
{"title":"“勾”?一个新的基于结果的研究生课程能否利用程序性评估减轻重症医学的评估负担?","authors":"Christopher Smith,&nbsp;Mumtaz Patel","doi":"10.1177/17511437211061642","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Context: </strong>Increasing dissatisfaction with existing methods of assessment in the workplace alongside a national drive towards outcomes-based postgraduate curricula led to a recent overhaul of the way Intensive Care Medicine (ICM) trainees are assessed in the United Kingdom. Programmatic assessment methodology was utilised; the existing 'tick-box' approach using workplace-based assessment to demonstrate competencies was de-emphasised and the expertise of trainers used to assess capability relating to fewer, high-level outcomes related to distinct areas of specialist practice.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A thematic analysis was undertaken investigating attitudes from 125 key stakeholders, including trainees and trainers, towards the new assessment strategy in relation to impact on assessment burden and acceptability.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>This qualitative study suggests increased satisfaction with the transition to an outcomes-based model with capability judged by educational supervisors. However, reflecting frustration relating to current assessment in the workplace, participants felt assessment burden has been significantly reduced. The approach taken was felt to be an improved method for assessing professional practice; there was enthusiasm for this change. However, this research highlights trainee and trainer anxiety regarding how to 'pass' these expert judgement decisions of capability in the real world. Additionally, concerns relating to the impact on subgroups of trainees due to the potential influence of implicit biases on the resultant fewer but 'higher stakes' interrogative judgements became apparent.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The move further towards a constructivist paradigm in workplace assessment in ICM reduces assessment burden yet can provoke anxiety amongst trainees and trainers requiring considered implementation. Furthermore, the perception of potential for bias in global judgements of performance requires further exploration.</p>","PeriodicalId":39161,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Intensive Care Society","volume":"24 2","pages":"170-177"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10227897/pdf/10.1177_17511437211061642.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"'Ticked off'? Can a new outcomes-based postgraduate curriculum utilising programmatic assessment reduce assessment burden in Intensive Care Medicine?\",\"authors\":\"Christopher Smith,&nbsp;Mumtaz Patel\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/17511437211061642\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Context: </strong>Increasing dissatisfaction with existing methods of assessment in the workplace alongside a national drive towards outcomes-based postgraduate curricula led to a recent overhaul of the way Intensive Care Medicine (ICM) trainees are assessed in the United Kingdom. Programmatic assessment methodology was utilised; the existing 'tick-box' approach using workplace-based assessment to demonstrate competencies was de-emphasised and the expertise of trainers used to assess capability relating to fewer, high-level outcomes related to distinct areas of specialist practice.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A thematic analysis was undertaken investigating attitudes from 125 key stakeholders, including trainees and trainers, towards the new assessment strategy in relation to impact on assessment burden and acceptability.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>This qualitative study suggests increased satisfaction with the transition to an outcomes-based model with capability judged by educational supervisors. However, reflecting frustration relating to current assessment in the workplace, participants felt assessment burden has been significantly reduced. The approach taken was felt to be an improved method for assessing professional practice; there was enthusiasm for this change. However, this research highlights trainee and trainer anxiety regarding how to 'pass' these expert judgement decisions of capability in the real world. Additionally, concerns relating to the impact on subgroups of trainees due to the potential influence of implicit biases on the resultant fewer but 'higher stakes' interrogative judgements became apparent.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The move further towards a constructivist paradigm in workplace assessment in ICM reduces assessment burden yet can provoke anxiety amongst trainees and trainers requiring considered implementation. Furthermore, the perception of potential for bias in global judgements of performance requires further exploration.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":39161,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the Intensive Care Society\",\"volume\":\"24 2\",\"pages\":\"170-177\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10227897/pdf/10.1177_17511437211061642.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the Intensive Care Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/17511437211061642\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Intensive Care Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17511437211061642","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:对工作场所现有评估方法的日益不满,以及国家对以结果为基础的研究生课程的推动,导致英国最近对重症监护医学(ICM)受训人员的评估方式进行了彻底改革。采用了方案评价方法;现有的使用基于工作场所的评估来展示能力的“打勾”方法不再被强调,培训师的专业知识被用于评估与不同专业实践领域相关的较少、高水平结果的能力。方法:进行专题分析,调查125个主要利益相关者,包括学员和培训师,对新评估策略的态度,对评估负担和可接受性的影响。结果:本质性研究显示,由教育主管来判断能力的结果为基础的模式的转变,提高了满意度。然而,反映出与工作场所目前的评估有关的挫败感,参与者感到评估负担已大大减轻。所采取的方法被认为是评估专业实践的改进方法;人们对这种改变充满热情。然而,这项研究强调了学员和培训师对于如何在现实世界中“通过”这些专家对能力的判断决策的焦虑。此外,由于内隐偏见对由此产生的较少但“高风险”的问询判断的潜在影响,有关对受训者分组的影响的担忧变得明显。结论:ICM在工作场所评估中进一步走向建构主义范式,减轻了评估负担,但也可能引起学员和培训师的焦虑,需要考虑实施。此外,对整体业绩判断中潜在偏见的认识需要进一步探索。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
'Ticked off'? Can a new outcomes-based postgraduate curriculum utilising programmatic assessment reduce assessment burden in Intensive Care Medicine?

Context: Increasing dissatisfaction with existing methods of assessment in the workplace alongside a national drive towards outcomes-based postgraduate curricula led to a recent overhaul of the way Intensive Care Medicine (ICM) trainees are assessed in the United Kingdom. Programmatic assessment methodology was utilised; the existing 'tick-box' approach using workplace-based assessment to demonstrate competencies was de-emphasised and the expertise of trainers used to assess capability relating to fewer, high-level outcomes related to distinct areas of specialist practice.

Methods: A thematic analysis was undertaken investigating attitudes from 125 key stakeholders, including trainees and trainers, towards the new assessment strategy in relation to impact on assessment burden and acceptability.

Results: This qualitative study suggests increased satisfaction with the transition to an outcomes-based model with capability judged by educational supervisors. However, reflecting frustration relating to current assessment in the workplace, participants felt assessment burden has been significantly reduced. The approach taken was felt to be an improved method for assessing professional practice; there was enthusiasm for this change. However, this research highlights trainee and trainer anxiety regarding how to 'pass' these expert judgement decisions of capability in the real world. Additionally, concerns relating to the impact on subgroups of trainees due to the potential influence of implicit biases on the resultant fewer but 'higher stakes' interrogative judgements became apparent.

Conclusion: The move further towards a constructivist paradigm in workplace assessment in ICM reduces assessment burden yet can provoke anxiety amongst trainees and trainers requiring considered implementation. Furthermore, the perception of potential for bias in global judgements of performance requires further exploration.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of the Intensive Care Society
Journal of the Intensive Care Society Nursing-Critical Care Nursing
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
45
期刊介绍: The Journal of the Intensive Care Society (JICS) is an international, peer-reviewed journal that strives to disseminate clinically and scientifically relevant peer-reviewed research, evaluation, experience and opinion to all staff working in the field of intensive care medicine. Our aim is to inform clinicians on the provision of best practice and provide direction for innovative scientific research in what is one of the broadest and most multi-disciplinary healthcare specialties. While original articles and systematic reviews lie at the heart of the Journal, we also value and recognise the need for opinion articles, case reports and correspondence to guide clinically and scientifically important areas in which conclusive evidence is lacking. The style of the Journal is based on its founding mission statement to ‘instruct, inform and entertain by encompassing the best aspects of both tabloid and broadsheet''.
期刊最新文献
Delivery of evidence-based critical care practices across the United Kingdom: A UK-wide multi-site service evaluation in adult units. In vivo assessment of a modification of a domiciliary ventilator which reduces oxygen consumption in mechanically ventilated patients. Management of adult mechanically ventilated patients: A UK-wide survey. Small volume fluid resuscitation and supplementation with 20% albumin versus buffered crystalloids in adults with septic shock: A protocol for a randomised feasibility trial. Should viscoelastic testing be a standard point-of-care test on all intensive care units?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1