在本科医学教育中实施核心委托专业活动:心理测量研究。

IF 5.3 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES Academic Medicine Pub Date : 2024-10-31 DOI:10.1097/ACM.0000000000005907
Claudio Violato, Robert Englander, Esther Dale, Jaqueline L Gauer
{"title":"在本科医学教育中实施核心委托专业活动:心理测量研究。","authors":"Claudio Violato, Robert Englander, Esther Dale, Jaqueline L Gauer","doi":"10.1097/ACM.0000000000005907","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study examines the feasibility and psychometric results of an assessment of entrustable professional activities (EPAs) as a core component of the clinical program of assessment in undergraduate medical education, assesses the learning curves for each EPA, explores the time to entrustment, and investigates the dependability of the EPA data based on generalizability theory (G theory) analysis.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Third-year medical students from the University of Minnesota Medical School in 7 required clerkships from May 2022 through April 2023 were assessed. Students were required to obtain at least 4 EPA assessments per week on average from clinical faculty, residents supervising the students, or assessment and coaching experts. Student ratings were depicted as curves describing their performance over time; regression models were used to fit the curves.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The complete class of 240 (138 women [58.0%] and 102 men [42.0%]) third-year medical students at the University of Minnesota Medical School (mean [SD] age at matriculation, 24.2 [2.7] years) participated. There were 32,614 EPA-based assessments (mean [SD], 136 [29.6] assessments per student). Reliability analysis using G theory found that an overall score dependability of 0.75 (range, 0-1) was achieved with 4 assessors on 4 occasions. The desired level of entrustment by academic year end was met by all 240 students (100%) for EPAs 1, 6, and 7, 237 (98.8%), 236 (98.3%), and 218 (90.8%) students for EPAs 2, 5, and 9, respectively, 197 students (82.1%) for EPA 3, 178 students (74.2%) for EPA 4, and 145 students (60.4%) for EPA 12. The most rapid growth was for EPA 2 (β0 = .286), followed by EPA 1 (β0 = .240), EPA 4 (β0 = .236), and EPA 10 (β0 = .230).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The study findings suggest that EPA ratings provide reliable and dependable data to make entrustment decisions about students' performance.</p>","PeriodicalId":50929,"journal":{"name":"Academic Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Implementing Core Entrustable Professional Activities in Undergraduate Medical Education: A Psychometric Study.\",\"authors\":\"Claudio Violato, Robert Englander, Esther Dale, Jaqueline L Gauer\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/ACM.0000000000005907\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study examines the feasibility and psychometric results of an assessment of entrustable professional activities (EPAs) as a core component of the clinical program of assessment in undergraduate medical education, assesses the learning curves for each EPA, explores the time to entrustment, and investigates the dependability of the EPA data based on generalizability theory (G theory) analysis.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Third-year medical students from the University of Minnesota Medical School in 7 required clerkships from May 2022 through April 2023 were assessed. Students were required to obtain at least 4 EPA assessments per week on average from clinical faculty, residents supervising the students, or assessment and coaching experts. Student ratings were depicted as curves describing their performance over time; regression models were used to fit the curves.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The complete class of 240 (138 women [58.0%] and 102 men [42.0%]) third-year medical students at the University of Minnesota Medical School (mean [SD] age at matriculation, 24.2 [2.7] years) participated. There were 32,614 EPA-based assessments (mean [SD], 136 [29.6] assessments per student). Reliability analysis using G theory found that an overall score dependability of 0.75 (range, 0-1) was achieved with 4 assessors on 4 occasions. The desired level of entrustment by academic year end was met by all 240 students (100%) for EPAs 1, 6, and 7, 237 (98.8%), 236 (98.3%), and 218 (90.8%) students for EPAs 2, 5, and 9, respectively, 197 students (82.1%) for EPA 3, 178 students (74.2%) for EPA 4, and 145 students (60.4%) for EPA 12. The most rapid growth was for EPA 2 (β0 = .286), followed by EPA 1 (β0 = .240), EPA 4 (β0 = .236), and EPA 10 (β0 = .230).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The study findings suggest that EPA ratings provide reliable and dependable data to make entrustment decisions about students' performance.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50929,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Academic Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Academic Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000005907\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Academic Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000005907","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究探讨了将可委托专业活动(EPA)评估作为本科医学教育临床评估项目核心组成部分的可行性和心理测量结果,评估了每项EPA的学习曲线,探讨了委托时间,并基于泛化理论(G理论)分析研究了EPA数据的可靠性:从 2022 年 5 月到 2023 年 4 月,对明尼苏达大学医学院 7 个必修实习的三年级医学生进行了评估。要求学生平均每周从临床教师、指导学生的住院医师或评估和指导专家处获得至少 4 次 EPA 评估。学生的评分被描绘成曲线,描述他们随着时间推移的表现;回归模型用于拟合曲线:明尼苏达大学医学院三年级全班 240 名学生(138 名女生[58.0%],102 名男生[42.0%])(平均[标码]入学年龄为 24.2 [2.7]岁)参加了此次活动。共进行了 32,614 次基于 EPA 的评估(平均 [SD] 为每位学生 136 [29.6] 次评估)。采用 G 理论进行的信度分析表明,4 名评估员 4 次评估的总分信度为 0.75(范围为 0-1)。到学年结束时,EPA 1、6 和 7 的 240 名学生(100%)、EPA 2、5 和 9 的 237 名学生(98.8%)、236 名学生(98.3%)和 218 名学生(90.8%)、EPA 3 的 197 名学生(82.1%)、EPA 4 的 178 名学生(74.2%)和 EPA 12 的 145 名学生(60.4%)都达到了预期的委托水平。增长最快的是 EPA 2 (β0 = .286),其次是 EPA 1 (β0 = .240)、EPA 4 (β0 = .236) 和 EPA 10 (β0 = .230):研究结果表明,EPA 评级提供了可靠的数据,可用于对学生的表现做出委托决策。
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
Implementing Core Entrustable Professional Activities in Undergraduate Medical Education: A Psychometric Study.

Purpose: This study examines the feasibility and psychometric results of an assessment of entrustable professional activities (EPAs) as a core component of the clinical program of assessment in undergraduate medical education, assesses the learning curves for each EPA, explores the time to entrustment, and investigates the dependability of the EPA data based on generalizability theory (G theory) analysis.

Method: Third-year medical students from the University of Minnesota Medical School in 7 required clerkships from May 2022 through April 2023 were assessed. Students were required to obtain at least 4 EPA assessments per week on average from clinical faculty, residents supervising the students, or assessment and coaching experts. Student ratings were depicted as curves describing their performance over time; regression models were used to fit the curves.

Results: The complete class of 240 (138 women [58.0%] and 102 men [42.0%]) third-year medical students at the University of Minnesota Medical School (mean [SD] age at matriculation, 24.2 [2.7] years) participated. There were 32,614 EPA-based assessments (mean [SD], 136 [29.6] assessments per student). Reliability analysis using G theory found that an overall score dependability of 0.75 (range, 0-1) was achieved with 4 assessors on 4 occasions. The desired level of entrustment by academic year end was met by all 240 students (100%) for EPAs 1, 6, and 7, 237 (98.8%), 236 (98.3%), and 218 (90.8%) students for EPAs 2, 5, and 9, respectively, 197 students (82.1%) for EPA 3, 178 students (74.2%) for EPA 4, and 145 students (60.4%) for EPA 12. The most rapid growth was for EPA 2 (β0 = .286), followed by EPA 1 (β0 = .240), EPA 4 (β0 = .236), and EPA 10 (β0 = .230).

Conclusions: The study findings suggest that EPA ratings provide reliable and dependable data to make entrustment decisions about students' performance.

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
Academic Medicine
Academic Medicine 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
9.50%
发文量
982
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Academic Medicine, the official peer-reviewed journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges, acts as an international forum for exchanging ideas, information, and strategies to address the significant challenges in academic medicine. The journal covers areas such as research, education, clinical care, community collaboration, and leadership, with a commitment to serving the public interest.
期刊最新文献
Validating the 2023 Association of American Medical Colleges Graduate Medical Education Leadership Competencies. World Federation for Medical Education Recognizes 5 International Accrediting Bodies. Irony. Teaching Opportunities for Postgraduate Trainees in Primary Care. How Many Is Too Many? Using Cognitive Load Theory to Determine the Maximum Safe Number of Inpatient Consultations for Trainees.
×
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