Use of an observer-based assessment measuring individual interprofessional competency in a didactic case collaboration activity.

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Philip T Rodgers, Kimberly A Sanders, Carol L Haggerty, Roxanne M Dsouza-Norwood, Allessandra M Bennett Lowery, Jacqueline Zeeman
{"title":"Use of an observer-based assessment measuring individual interprofessional competency in a didactic case collaboration activity.","authors":"Philip T Rodgers, Kimberly A Sanders, Carol L Haggerty, Roxanne M Dsouza-Norwood, Allessandra M Bennett Lowery, Jacqueline Zeeman","doi":"10.1080/13561820.2025.2546895","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Existing interprofessional education assessment tools generally lack an observer-based evaluation approach to assess individual student performance within a team. We investigated the Interprofessional Education Collaborative (IPEC) Competency Assessment Tool for Individual Students (ICATIS) to evaluate individual student IPEC competency during an interprofessional case activity in a didactic classroom-based course using trained observers. Five observers reviewed videos of pharmacy (<i>n</i> = 65), dental (<i>n</i> = 35), and dental hygiene (<i>n</i> = 15) students collaborating on an interprofessional case activity. All 115 participating students were evaluated using the ICATIS. Observers rated students on pre-selected IPEC competencies as competent, developing, or minimal. Students completed self-evaluations on the same IPEC competencies. ICATIS ratings were shared with the evaluated student. The most frequent rating given was \"competent\" (38%), then \"developing\" (32%), and \"minimal\" (9%). Student self-evaluations were frequently higher than evaluators' ratings. Participating students and evaluators were surveyed for their perspectives on ICATIS. Students overall had positive opinions about the ICATIS evaluations received and provided suggestions for improvement. The ICATIS efficiently evaluated individual student interprofessional competency in the interprofessional activity across health profession programs, addressing a gap in observer-based evaluations of individual IPEC competencies.</p>","PeriodicalId":50174,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Interprofessional Care","volume":" ","pages":"1-8"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Interprofessional Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13561820.2025.2546895","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Existing interprofessional education assessment tools generally lack an observer-based evaluation approach to assess individual student performance within a team. We investigated the Interprofessional Education Collaborative (IPEC) Competency Assessment Tool for Individual Students (ICATIS) to evaluate individual student IPEC competency during an interprofessional case activity in a didactic classroom-based course using trained observers. Five observers reviewed videos of pharmacy (n = 65), dental (n = 35), and dental hygiene (n = 15) students collaborating on an interprofessional case activity. All 115 participating students were evaluated using the ICATIS. Observers rated students on pre-selected IPEC competencies as competent, developing, or minimal. Students completed self-evaluations on the same IPEC competencies. ICATIS ratings were shared with the evaluated student. The most frequent rating given was "competent" (38%), then "developing" (32%), and "minimal" (9%). Student self-evaluations were frequently higher than evaluators' ratings. Participating students and evaluators were surveyed for their perspectives on ICATIS. Students overall had positive opinions about the ICATIS evaluations received and provided suggestions for improvement. The ICATIS efficiently evaluated individual student interprofessional competency in the interprofessional activity across health profession programs, addressing a gap in observer-based evaluations of individual IPEC competencies.

在教学案例合作活动中使用基于观察员的评估来衡量个人的跨专业能力。
现有的跨专业教育评估工具通常缺乏基于观察者的评估方法来评估团队中单个学生的表现。在课堂教学课程的跨专业案例活动中,我们使用训练有素的观察员,调查了针对个别学生的跨专业教育协作(IPEC)能力评估工具(ICATIS),以评估个别学生的IPEC能力。五名观察员回顾了药学(n = 65)、牙科(n = 35)和口腔卫生(n = 15)学生在跨专业案例活动中合作的视频。所有115名学生都使用ICATIS进行了评估。观察员评价学生预选IPEC能力胜任,发展,或最低。学生们完成了相同的IPEC能力的自我评估。与被评估的学生共享ICATIS评分。最常见的评级是“胜任”(38%),然后是“发展中”(32%),最后是“最低限度”(9%)。学生的自我评价常常高于评价者的评分。参与调查的学生和评议者对ICATIS的看法。学生们对收到的ICATIS评价总体上持积极态度,并提出了改进建议。ICATIS有效地评估了学生在卫生专业项目跨专业活动中的跨专业能力,解决了基于观察者的个人IPEC能力评估的差距。
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
Journal of Interprofessional Care
Journal of Interprofessional Care HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
14.80%
发文量
124
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Interprofessional Care disseminates research and new developments in the field of interprofessional education and practice. We welcome contributions containing an explicit interprofessional focus, and involving a range of settings, professions, and fields. Areas of practice covered include primary, community and hospital care, health education and public health, and beyond health and social care into fields such as criminal justice and primary/elementary education. Papers introducing additional interprofessional views, for example, from a community development or environmental design perspective, are welcome. The Journal is disseminated internationally and encourages submissions 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:604180095
Book学术官方微信