考官工作量比较:欧洲麻醉学和重症监护文凭的三种结构化口试形式。

IF 3.1 2区 医学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Medical Education Online Pub Date : 2024-12-31 Epub Date: 2024-06-07 DOI:10.1080/10872981.2024.2364990
Mikhail Dziadzko, Andrey Varvinskiy, Rodolphe Di Loreto, Hugues Scipioni, Bazil Ateleanu, Markus Klimek, Joana Berger-Estilita
{"title":"考官工作量比较:欧洲麻醉学和重症监护文凭的三种结构化口试形式。","authors":"Mikhail Dziadzko, Andrey Varvinskiy, Rodolphe Di Loreto, Hugues Scipioni, Bazil Ateleanu, Markus Klimek, Joana Berger-Estilita","doi":"10.1080/10872981.2024.2364990","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The COVID-19 pandemic triggered transformations in academic medicine, rapidly adopting remote teaching and online assessments. Whilst virtual environments show promise in evaluating medical knowledge, their impact on examiner workload is unclear. This study explores examiner's workload during different European Diploma in Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Part 2 Structured Oral Examinations formats. We hypothesise that online exams result in lower examiner's workload than traditional face-to-face methods. We also investigate workload structure and its correlation with examiner characteristics and marking performance. In 2023, examiner's workload for three examination formats (face-to-face, hybrid, online) using the NASA TLX instrument was prospectively evaluated. The impact of examiner demographics, candidate scoring agreement, and examination scores on workload was analysed. The overall NASA TLX score from 215 workload measurements in 142 examiners was high at 59.61 ± 14.13. The online examination had a statistically higher workload (61.65 ± 12.84) than hybrid but not face-to-face. Primary contributors to workload were mental and temporal demands, and effort. Online exams were associated with elevated frustration. Male examiners and those spending more time on exam preparation experienced a higher workload. Multiple diploma specialties and familiarity with European Diploma in Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care exams were protective against high workload. Perceived workload did not impact marking agreement or examination scores across all formats. Examiners experience high workload. Online exams are not systematically associated with decreased workload, likely due to frustration. Despite workload differences, no impact on examiner's performance or examination scores was found. The hybrid examination mode, combining face-to-face and online, was associated with a minor but statistically significant workload reduction. This hybrid approach may offer a more balanced and efficient examination process while maintaining integrity, cost savings, and increased accessibility for candidates.</p>","PeriodicalId":47656,"journal":{"name":"Medical Education Online","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11164053/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Examiner workload comparison: three structured oral examination formats for the European diploma in anaesthesiology and intensive care.\",\"authors\":\"Mikhail Dziadzko, Andrey Varvinskiy, Rodolphe Di Loreto, Hugues Scipioni, Bazil Ateleanu, Markus Klimek, Joana Berger-Estilita\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10872981.2024.2364990\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The COVID-19 pandemic triggered transformations in academic medicine, rapidly adopting remote teaching and online assessments. Whilst virtual environments show promise in evaluating medical knowledge, their impact on examiner workload is unclear. This study explores examiner's workload during different European Diploma in Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Part 2 Structured Oral Examinations formats. We hypothesise that online exams result in lower examiner's workload than traditional face-to-face methods. We also investigate workload structure and its correlation with examiner characteristics and marking performance. In 2023, examiner's workload for three examination formats (face-to-face, hybrid, online) using the NASA TLX instrument was prospectively evaluated. The impact of examiner demographics, candidate scoring agreement, and examination scores on workload was analysed. The overall NASA TLX score from 215 workload measurements in 142 examiners was high at 59.61 ± 14.13. The online examination had a statistically higher workload (61.65 ± 12.84) than hybrid but not face-to-face. Primary contributors to workload were mental and temporal demands, and effort. Online exams were associated with elevated frustration. Male examiners and those spending more time on exam preparation experienced a higher workload. Multiple diploma specialties and familiarity with European Diploma in Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care exams were protective against high workload. Perceived workload did not impact marking agreement or examination scores across all formats. Examiners experience high workload. Online exams are not systematically associated with decreased workload, likely due to frustration. Despite workload differences, no impact on examiner's performance or examination scores was found. The hybrid examination mode, combining face-to-face and online, was associated with a minor but statistically significant workload reduction. This hybrid approach may offer a more balanced and efficient examination process while maintaining integrity, cost savings, and increased accessibility for candidates.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47656,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medical Education Online\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11164053/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medical Education Online\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2024.2364990\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/6/7 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Education Online","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2024.2364990","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

COVID-19 大流行引发了医学学术界的变革,迅速采用了远程教学和在线评估。虽然虚拟环境在评估医学知识方面大有可为,但其对考官工作量的影响尚不明确。本研究探讨了考官在不同的欧洲麻醉学和重症监护文凭第二部分结构化口试形式中的工作量。我们假设,与传统的面对面考试方式相比,在线考试会降低考官的工作量。我们还调查了工作量结构及其与考官特点和评分表现的相关性。2023 年,我们使用 NASA TLX 工具对三种考试形式(面对面、混合、在线)的考官工作量进行了前瞻性评估。分析了考官的人口统计学特征、考生评分一致性和考试分数对工作量的影响。在对 142 名考官的 215 次工作量测量中,NASA TLX 的总体得分较高,为 59.61 ± 14.13。据统计,在线考试的工作量(61.65 ± 12.84)高于混合考试,但不高于面对面考试。造成工作量的主要因素是精神和时间需求以及努力程度。在线考试的挫败感较高。男性考生和花更多时间准备考试的考生的工作量更大。多个专业文凭以及熟悉欧洲麻醉学和重症监护文凭考试对减轻高工作量具有保护作用。在所有形式的考试中,认为的工作量并不影响评分的一致性或考试分数。考官的工作量很大。在线考试与工作量减少没有系统性联系,这可能是由于挫败感造成的。尽管工作量存在差异,但对考官的表现或考试成绩没有影响。面授和在线相结合的混合考试模式虽然工作量略有减少,但在统计学上却有显著意义。这种混合方式可以提供一个更加平衡和高效的考试过程,同时保持完整性、节约成本并提高考生的可及性。
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
Examiner workload comparison: three structured oral examination formats for the European diploma in anaesthesiology and intensive care.

The COVID-19 pandemic triggered transformations in academic medicine, rapidly adopting remote teaching and online assessments. Whilst virtual environments show promise in evaluating medical knowledge, their impact on examiner workload is unclear. This study explores examiner's workload during different European Diploma in Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Part 2 Structured Oral Examinations formats. We hypothesise that online exams result in lower examiner's workload than traditional face-to-face methods. We also investigate workload structure and its correlation with examiner characteristics and marking performance. In 2023, examiner's workload for three examination formats (face-to-face, hybrid, online) using the NASA TLX instrument was prospectively evaluated. The impact of examiner demographics, candidate scoring agreement, and examination scores on workload was analysed. The overall NASA TLX score from 215 workload measurements in 142 examiners was high at 59.61 ± 14.13. The online examination had a statistically higher workload (61.65 ± 12.84) than hybrid but not face-to-face. Primary contributors to workload were mental and temporal demands, and effort. Online exams were associated with elevated frustration. Male examiners and those spending more time on exam preparation experienced a higher workload. Multiple diploma specialties and familiarity with European Diploma in Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care exams were protective against high workload. Perceived workload did not impact marking agreement or examination scores across all formats. Examiners experience high workload. Online exams are not systematically associated with decreased workload, likely due to frustration. Despite workload differences, no impact on examiner's performance or examination scores was found. The hybrid examination mode, combining face-to-face and online, was associated with a minor but statistically significant workload reduction. This hybrid approach may offer a more balanced and efficient examination process while maintaining integrity, cost savings, and increased accessibility for candidates.

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
Medical Education Online
Medical Education Online EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
2.20%
发文量
97
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: Medical Education Online is an open access journal of health care education, publishing peer-reviewed research, perspectives, reviews, and early documentation of new ideas and trends. Medical Education Online aims to disseminate information on the education and training of physicians and other health care professionals. Manuscripts may address any aspect of health care education and training, including, but not limited to: -Basic science education -Clinical science education -Residency education -Learning theory -Problem-based learning (PBL) -Curriculum development -Research design and statistics -Measurement and evaluation -Faculty development -Informatics/web
期刊最新文献
Medical law; promotion of medicine curriculum: a letter to editor. Tips for developing a coaching program in medical education. High- and low-achieving international medical students' perceptions of the factors influencing their academic performance at Chinese universities. A Medical Education Research Library: key research topics and associated experts. Financial barriers and inequity in medical education in India: challenges to training a diverse and representative healthcare workforce.
×
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
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