Assessment practices for dietetic students: An updated systematic review (2017-2024).

IF 2.6 4区 医学 Q3 NUTRITION & DIETETICS
Janica Jamieson, Claire Palermo, Margaret Hay, Simone Gibson
{"title":"Assessment practices for dietetic students: An updated systematic review (2017-2024).","authors":"Janica Jamieson, Claire Palermo, Margaret Hay, Simone Gibson","doi":"10.1111/1747-0080.70001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>Evaluate assessment practices and outcomes for dietetic students and compare findings with those from a previous systematic review.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review was conducted whereby four databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Cumulative Index in Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Education Resources Information Centre) were searched on 11 October 2023 with terms related to dietetics, students, and assessment. The search was repeated on 8 January 2025 to identify new publications. Eligibility criteria were primary research published after 1 June 2017 reporting at least one assessment method for dietetic students with an assessment-related outcome. Assessment practices and outcomes were evaluated using Miller's Pyramid, the New World Kirkpatrick's Hierarchy, and the principles of programmatic assessment.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From 5701 search results, 22 were identified, revealing new assessment practices, including entrustable professional activities, e-portfolios, and programmatic assessment, localised to Australia and Singapore. Compared to publications prior to 2017, a greater proportion conceptualised assessment as part of a system (46% compared to 28%) with a sustained higher prevalence of does and shows levels of Miller's Pyramid. Evaluation continued to focus on reaction, learning, and behaviour.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Findings indicate a transition towards programmatic approaches to systems of assessment within dietetics, though this shift was not observed globally. Such a shift is crucial for ensuring the profession's agility in responding to modern disruptors and maintaining the delivery of high-quality education.</p>","PeriodicalId":19368,"journal":{"name":"Nutrition & Dietetics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nutrition & Dietetics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1747-0080.70001","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NUTRITION & DIETETICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: Evaluate assessment practices and outcomes for dietetic students and compare findings with those from a previous systematic review.

Methods: A systematic review was conducted whereby four databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Cumulative Index in Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Education Resources Information Centre) were searched on 11 October 2023 with terms related to dietetics, students, and assessment. The search was repeated on 8 January 2025 to identify new publications. Eligibility criteria were primary research published after 1 June 2017 reporting at least one assessment method for dietetic students with an assessment-related outcome. Assessment practices and outcomes were evaluated using Miller's Pyramid, the New World Kirkpatrick's Hierarchy, and the principles of programmatic assessment.

Results: From 5701 search results, 22 were identified, revealing new assessment practices, including entrustable professional activities, e-portfolios, and programmatic assessment, localised to Australia and Singapore. Compared to publications prior to 2017, a greater proportion conceptualised assessment as part of a system (46% compared to 28%) with a sustained higher prevalence of does and shows levels of Miller's Pyramid. Evaluation continued to focus on reaction, learning, and behaviour.

Conclusions: Findings indicate a transition towards programmatic approaches to systems of assessment within dietetics, though this shift was not observed globally. Such a shift is crucial for ensuring the profession's agility in responding to modern disruptors and maintaining the delivery of high-quality education.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Nutrition & Dietetics
Nutrition & Dietetics 医学-营养学
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
16.10%
发文量
69
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Nutrition & Dietetics is the official journal of the Dietitians Association of Australia. Covering all aspects of food, nutrition and dietetics, the Journal provides a forum for the reporting, discussion and development of scientifically credible knowledge related to human nutrition and dietetics. Widely respected in Australia and around the world, Nutrition & Dietetics publishes original research, methodology analyses, research reviews and much more. The Journal aims to keep health professionals abreast of current knowledge on human nutrition and diet, and accepts contributions from around the world.
×
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