Rachel Curtis, Christine C Moon, Tessa Hanmore, Wilma M Hopman, Stephanie Baxter
{"title":"用词得当:评价眼科学能力医学教育评价中用词和字数对叙事反馈质量的影响。","authors":"Rachel Curtis, Christine C Moon, Tessa Hanmore, Wilma M Hopman, Stephanie Baxter","doi":"10.36834/cmej.76671","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of word choice on the quality of narrative feedback in ophthalmology resident trainee assessments following the introduction of competency-based medical education at Queen's University.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Assessment data from July 2017-December 2020 were retrieved from Elentra<sup>TM</sup> (Integrated Teaching and Learning Platform) and anonymized. Written feedback was assigned a Quality of Assessment for Learning (QuAL) score out of five based on this previously validated rubric. The correlation between QuAL score and specific coaching words was determined using a Spearman's Rho analysis. Independent samples t-tests were used to compare the QuAL score when a specific word was used, and when it was absent.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 1997 individual assessments were used in this analysis. The number of times the identified coaching words were used within a comment was significantly and positively associated with the total QuAL score, with the exception of \"next time\" (rho=0.039, p=0.082), \"read\" (rho = 0.036, <i>p</i> = 0.112), \"read more\" (rho = -0.025, <i>p</i> = 0.256) and \"review\" (rho = -0.017, <i>p</i> = 0.440). The strongest correlations were for \"continue\" (rho = 0.182, <i>p</i> < 0.001), \"try(ing)\" (rho = 0.113, <i>p</i> < 0.001) and \"next step\" (rho = 0.103, <i>p</i> < 0.001). The mean value of the QuAL score increased when coaching words were used vs. not used with the largest mean difference of 1.44 (<i>p</i> < 0.001) for \"reflect\". A clear positive relationship was demonstrated between word count and QuAL score (rho = .556, <i>p</i> < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The use of certain coaching words in written comments may improve the quality of feedback.</p>","PeriodicalId":72503,"journal":{"name":"Canadian medical education journal","volume":"15 6","pages":"58-63"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11725001/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Use the right words: evaluating the effect of word choice and word count on quality of narrative feedback in ophthalmology competency-based medical education assessments.\",\"authors\":\"Rachel Curtis, Christine C Moon, Tessa Hanmore, Wilma M Hopman, Stephanie Baxter\",\"doi\":\"10.36834/cmej.76671\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of word choice on the quality of narrative feedback in ophthalmology resident trainee assessments following the introduction of competency-based medical education at Queen's University.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Assessment data from July 2017-December 2020 were retrieved from Elentra<sup>TM</sup> (Integrated Teaching and Learning Platform) and anonymized. Written feedback was assigned a Quality of Assessment for Learning (QuAL) score out of five based on this previously validated rubric. The correlation between QuAL score and specific coaching words was determined using a Spearman's Rho analysis. Independent samples t-tests were used to compare the QuAL score when a specific word was used, and when it was absent.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 1997 individual assessments were used in this analysis. The number of times the identified coaching words were used within a comment was significantly and positively associated with the total QuAL score, with the exception of \\\"next time\\\" (rho=0.039, p=0.082), \\\"read\\\" (rho = 0.036, <i>p</i> = 0.112), \\\"read more\\\" (rho = -0.025, <i>p</i> = 0.256) and \\\"review\\\" (rho = -0.017, <i>p</i> = 0.440). The strongest correlations were for \\\"continue\\\" (rho = 0.182, <i>p</i> < 0.001), \\\"try(ing)\\\" (rho = 0.113, <i>p</i> < 0.001) and \\\"next step\\\" (rho = 0.103, <i>p</i> < 0.001). The mean value of the QuAL score increased when coaching words were used vs. not used with the largest mean difference of 1.44 (<i>p</i> < 0.001) for \\\"reflect\\\". A clear positive relationship was demonstrated between word count and QuAL score (rho = .556, <i>p</i> < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The use of certain coaching words in written comments may improve the quality of feedback.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72503,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Canadian medical education journal\",\"volume\":\"15 6\",\"pages\":\"58-63\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11725001/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Canadian medical education journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.36834/cmej.76671\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/12/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian medical education journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36834/cmej.76671","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:本研究的目的是探讨皇后大学引入能力为基础的医学教育后,在眼科住院医师见习评估中,用词选择对叙述反馈质量的影响。方法:2017年7月至2020年12月的评估数据从ElentraTM (Integrated Teaching and Learning Platform)中检索并匿名化。书面反馈被分配一个学习质量评估(QuAL)分数,满分为5分,基于这个先前验证的标题。使用Spearman's Rho分析确定了QuAL得分与特定教练话语之间的相关性。使用独立样本t检验来比较使用特定单词和不使用特定单词时的QuAL分数。结果:本分析共使用了1997份个人评估。除了“下次”(rho=0.039, p=0.082)、“阅读”(rho= 0.036, p= 0.112)、“多读”(rho= -0.025, p= 0.256)和“复习”(rho= -0.017, p= 0.440)外,已识别的教练词汇在评论中使用的次数与QuAL总分呈显著正相关。相关性最强的是“continue”(rho = 0.182, p < 0.001)和“try(ing)”。(rho = 0.113, p < 0.001)和“下一步”(rho = 0.103, p < 0.001)。使用与不使用教练词时,QuAL得分的平均值增加,其中“反映”的平均差异最大,为1.44 (p < 0.001)。字数与QuAL评分之间存在明显的正相关关系(rho = 0.556, p < 0.001)。结论:在书面评论中使用一定的指导语可以提高反馈的质量。
Use the right words: evaluating the effect of word choice and word count on quality of narrative feedback in ophthalmology competency-based medical education assessments.
Background: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of word choice on the quality of narrative feedback in ophthalmology resident trainee assessments following the introduction of competency-based medical education at Queen's University.
Methods: Assessment data from July 2017-December 2020 were retrieved from ElentraTM (Integrated Teaching and Learning Platform) and anonymized. Written feedback was assigned a Quality of Assessment for Learning (QuAL) score out of five based on this previously validated rubric. The correlation between QuAL score and specific coaching words was determined using a Spearman's Rho analysis. Independent samples t-tests were used to compare the QuAL score when a specific word was used, and when it was absent.
Results: A total of 1997 individual assessments were used in this analysis. The number of times the identified coaching words were used within a comment was significantly and positively associated with the total QuAL score, with the exception of "next time" (rho=0.039, p=0.082), "read" (rho = 0.036, p = 0.112), "read more" (rho = -0.025, p = 0.256) and "review" (rho = -0.017, p = 0.440). The strongest correlations were for "continue" (rho = 0.182, p < 0.001), "try(ing)" (rho = 0.113, p < 0.001) and "next step" (rho = 0.103, p < 0.001). The mean value of the QuAL score increased when coaching words were used vs. not used with the largest mean difference of 1.44 (p < 0.001) for "reflect". A clear positive relationship was demonstrated between word count and QuAL score (rho = .556, p < 0.001).
Conclusions: The use of certain coaching words in written comments may improve the quality of feedback.