Initial Validity Evidence for the American Board of Emergency Medicine Emergency Medical Services Certification Examination.

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q2 EMERGENCY MEDICINE
Earl J Reisdorff, Kevin B Joldersma, Chadd K Kraus, Melissa A Barton, Barry J Knapp, Douglas F Kupas, Brian M Clemency, Mohamud Daya
{"title":"Initial Validity Evidence for the American Board of Emergency Medicine Emergency Medical Services Certification Examination.","authors":"Earl J Reisdorff, Kevin B Joldersma, Chadd K Kraus, Melissa A Barton, Barry J Knapp, Douglas F Kupas, Brian M Clemency, Mohamud Daya","doi":"10.1080/10903127.2024.2379872","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The American Board of Emergency Medicine (ABEM) Emergency Medical Services Medicine (EMS) subspecialty was approved by the American Board of Medical Specialties on September 23, 2010. Subspecialty certification in EMS was contingent on two key elements-completing Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)-accredited EMS training and passing the subspecialty certification examination developed by ABEM. The first EMS certification examination was offered in October 2013. Meaningful certification requires rigorous assessment. In this instance, the EMS certification examination sought to embrace the tenets of validity, reliability, and fairness. For the purposes of this report, the sources of validity evidence were anchored on the EMS core content, the examination development process, and the association between fellowship training and passing the certification examination.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We chose to use validity evidence that included: 1) content validity (based on the EMS core content); 2) response processes (test items required intended cognitive processes); 3) internal structure supported by the internal relationships among items; 4) relations to other variables, specifically the association between examination performance and ACGME-accredited fellowship training; and 5) the consequences of testing.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There is strong content validity evidence for the EMS examination based on the core content and its detailed development process. The core content and supporting job-task analysis was also used to define the examination blueprint. Internal structure support was evidenced by Cronbach's coefficient alpha, which ranged from 0.82 to 0.92. Physicians who completed ACGME-accredited EMS fellowship training were more likely to pass the EMS certification examination (chi square, <i>p</i> < 0.0001; Cramér's, <i>V</i> = 0.24). Finally, there were two sources of consequential validity evidence-use of test results to determine certification and use of the resulting certificate.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There is substantial and varied validity evidence to support the use of the EMS certifying examination in making summative decisions to award certification in EMS. Of note, there was a statistically significant association between ACGME-accredited fellowship training and passing the examination.</p>","PeriodicalId":20336,"journal":{"name":"Prehospital Emergency Care","volume":" ","pages":"1-6"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Prehospital Emergency Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10903127.2024.2379872","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: The American Board of Emergency Medicine (ABEM) Emergency Medical Services Medicine (EMS) subspecialty was approved by the American Board of Medical Specialties on September 23, 2010. Subspecialty certification in EMS was contingent on two key elements-completing Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)-accredited EMS training and passing the subspecialty certification examination developed by ABEM. The first EMS certification examination was offered in October 2013. Meaningful certification requires rigorous assessment. In this instance, the EMS certification examination sought to embrace the tenets of validity, reliability, and fairness. For the purposes of this report, the sources of validity evidence were anchored on the EMS core content, the examination development process, and the association between fellowship training and passing the certification examination.

Methods: We chose to use validity evidence that included: 1) content validity (based on the EMS core content); 2) response processes (test items required intended cognitive processes); 3) internal structure supported by the internal relationships among items; 4) relations to other variables, specifically the association between examination performance and ACGME-accredited fellowship training; and 5) the consequences of testing.

Results: There is strong content validity evidence for the EMS examination based on the core content and its detailed development process. The core content and supporting job-task analysis was also used to define the examination blueprint. Internal structure support was evidenced by Cronbach's coefficient alpha, which ranged from 0.82 to 0.92. Physicians who completed ACGME-accredited EMS fellowship training were more likely to pass the EMS certification examination (chi square, p < 0.0001; Cramér's, V = 0.24). Finally, there were two sources of consequential validity evidence-use of test results to determine certification and use of the resulting certificate.

Conclusions: There is substantial and varied validity evidence to support the use of the EMS certifying examination in making summative decisions to award certification in EMS. Of note, there was a statistically significant association between ACGME-accredited fellowship training and passing the examination.

美国急诊医学委员会急诊医疗服务认证考试的初始有效性证据。
目标:美国急诊医学委员会(ABEM)急诊医疗服务医学(EMS)于 2010 年 9 月 23 日获得美国医学专科委员会批准。急救医疗服务亚专科认证取决于两个关键要素--完成毕业医学教育认证委员会(ACGME)认可的急救医疗服务培训和通过 ABEM 制定的亚专科认证考试。首次急救医疗认证考试于 2013 年 10 月举行。有意义的认证需要严格的评估。在这种情况下,急救医疗认证考试力求体现有效性、可靠性和公平性的原则。就本报告而言,有效性证据的来源主要是急救医疗核心内容、考试开发过程以及研究员培训与通过认证考试之间的关联:我们选择使用的有效性证据包括1) 内容效度(基于 EMS 核心内容);2) 反应过程(测试项目需要预期的认知过程);3) 由项目间内部关系支持的内部结构;4) 与其他变量的关系,特别是考试成绩与 ACGME 认可的研究员培训之间的关系;以及 5) 测试的结果:结果:基于核心内容及其详细的开发过程,急救医疗考试的内容效度证据确凿。核心内容和支持性工作任务分析也用于确定考试蓝图。Cronbach's coefficient alpha(克朗巴赫系数α)从 0.82 到 0.92 不等,证明了内部结构的支持。完成 ACGME 认可的 EMS 研究员培训的医生更有可能通过 EMS 认证考试(chi square,p < 0.0001;Cramér's,V = 0.24)。最后,结果有效性证据有两个来源--使用考试结果来确定认证和使用所获得的证书:有大量不同的有效性证据支持使用急救医疗服务认证考试来做出授予急救医疗服务认证的终结性决定。值得注意的是,ACGME 认可的研究员培训与通过考试之间存在统计学意义上的显著关联。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Prehospital Emergency Care
Prehospital Emergency Care 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
12.50%
发文量
137
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Prehospital Emergency Care publishes peer-reviewed information relevant to the practice, educational advancement, and investigation of prehospital emergency care, including the following types of articles: Special Contributions - Original Articles - Education and Practice - Preliminary Reports - Case Conferences - Position Papers - Collective Reviews - Editorials - Letters to the Editor - Media Reviews.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信