Discriminative validity of the interprofessional Collaborator Assessment Rubric.

Abstract

This paper reports on the discriminative validity of the Interprofessional Collaborator Assessment Rubric (ICAR) as a tool for evaluating interprofessional collaboration skills. Direct observation is essential in medical residency training, enhancing clinical competence and educational quality. The study involved 50 medical faculty members from 11 Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation residency programs who evaluated 12 scripted videos depicting four performance levels - minimal, developing, competent, and mastery - using the ICAR. The videos featured six standardized interprofessional participants, facilitated by a third-year postgraduate medical resident, in an interprofessional team meeting. Participants rated the interprofessional skills observed across six dimensions and 31-items on the ICAR 5-point scale with a maximum score of 124. Results showed that the ICAR effectively distinguished between different performance levels, with statistically significant differences in ratings (p < .001). The mean scores for the videos were as follows: minimal competency = 34.54, developing competence = 70.23, competent = 92.75, and mastery = 121.3. The study highlights the ICAR's discriminative validity and ability to differentiate interprofessional skills accurately. Future researchers should explore enhancing faculty observation skills and reducing interrater variability. In conclusion, the ICAR is a promising tool for assessing interprofessional skills and supporting competency-based decision-making in residency training.