Unseen Influences in Physician Assistant Education: Exploring Latent Factors in Supervised Clinical Practice Experiences.

Q2 Health Professions
Hannah R Wright, Jaclyn Demeter, Mitchell Barnett, Eric Ip, Kevin Bogenschutz, Michael Sulewski, Elena Dvoiris, Susan Jameson
{"title":"Unseen Influences in Physician Assistant Education: Exploring Latent Factors in Supervised Clinical Practice Experiences.","authors":"Hannah R Wright, Jaclyn Demeter, Mitchell Barnett, Eric Ip, Kevin Bogenschutz, Michael Sulewski, Elena Dvoiris, Susan Jameson","doi":"10.1097/JPA.0000000000000743","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Physician assistant/associate (PA) programs assess student clinical competence using both standardized exams and preceptor evaluations from supervised clinical practice experiences. However, it remains unclear to what extent the clinical environment influences preceptor evaluations and what specific constructs these evaluations capture. This study explores the relationship between the latent factors underlying standardized exams and preceptor evaluations.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective, cross-sectional analysis of student-level data from 3 PA programs across diverse regions of the country (2020-2024; n = 782) was performed. Measures included PA National Certification Exam (PANCE) task scores; end of rotation (EOR) exam task scores for internal medicine (IM), family medicine (FM), and emergency medicine (EM); and preceptor evaluations for the corresponding clinical rotations. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) (least-squares estimation, Promax rotation; eigenvalue >1 criterion) identified latent factors.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A 4-factor solution explained 54.3% of variance. Standardized assessments (PANCE and EOR task scores) loaded together on a single factor, whereas preceptor evaluations formed 3 distinct factors corresponding to FM, EM, and IM. Each factor contributed comparably equal to the variance, with minimal cross-loading between standardized exams and preceptor ratings.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Findings indicate that standardized exams assess a common knowledge or clinical reasoning construct, while preceptor evaluations capture rotation-specific dimensions. This may be due to context-dependent performance and interpersonal/professional behaviors, distinct from test-based knowledge. These findings have implications for programs and stakeholders. Future work should examine environmental and evaluator influences and incorporate additional noncognitive domains.</p>","PeriodicalId":39231,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Physician Assistant Education","volume":" ","pages":"269-273"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Physician Assistant Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/JPA.0000000000000743","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/3/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Health Professions","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Physician assistant/associate (PA) programs assess student clinical competence using both standardized exams and preceptor evaluations from supervised clinical practice experiences. However, it remains unclear to what extent the clinical environment influences preceptor evaluations and what specific constructs these evaluations capture. This study explores the relationship between the latent factors underlying standardized exams and preceptor evaluations.

Methods: A retrospective, cross-sectional analysis of student-level data from 3 PA programs across diverse regions of the country (2020-2024; n = 782) was performed. Measures included PA National Certification Exam (PANCE) task scores; end of rotation (EOR) exam task scores for internal medicine (IM), family medicine (FM), and emergency medicine (EM); and preceptor evaluations for the corresponding clinical rotations. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) (least-squares estimation, Promax rotation; eigenvalue >1 criterion) identified latent factors.

Results: A 4-factor solution explained 54.3% of variance. Standardized assessments (PANCE and EOR task scores) loaded together on a single factor, whereas preceptor evaluations formed 3 distinct factors corresponding to FM, EM, and IM. Each factor contributed comparably equal to the variance, with minimal cross-loading between standardized exams and preceptor ratings.

Discussion: Findings indicate that standardized exams assess a common knowledge or clinical reasoning construct, while preceptor evaluations capture rotation-specific dimensions. This may be due to context-dependent performance and interpersonal/professional behaviors, distinct from test-based knowledge. These findings have implications for programs and stakeholders. Future work should examine environmental and evaluator influences and incorporate additional noncognitive domains.

医师助理教育的隐性影响:探索监督临床实践经验的潜在因素。
简介:医师助理/助理(PA)项目通过标准化考试和监督临床实践经验的导师评估来评估学生的临床能力。然而,目前尚不清楚临床环境对感受器评估的影响程度,以及这些评估所捕获的具体结构。本研究探讨标准化考试潜在因素与教师评价之间的关系。方法:对全国不同地区(2020-2024;n = 782)的3个PA项目的学生水平数据进行回顾性横断面分析。指标包括PA国家认证考试(PANCE)任务分数;内科(IM)、家庭医学(FM)、急诊医学(EM)轮岗结束(EOR)考试任务分数;并对相应的临床轮转教师进行评估。探索性因子分析(EFA)(最小二乘估计,Promax旋转,特征值bbb1准则)确定潜在因素。结果:一个4因素的解决方案解释了54.3%的方差。标准化评估(PANCE和EOR任务分数)加载在一个因素上,而训导评估形成3个不同的因素,分别对应于FM、EM和IM。每个因素对差异的贡献相当相等,标准化考试和教师评分之间的交叉负荷最小。讨论:研究结果表明,标准化考试评估的是共同知识或临床推理结构,而教师评估捕获的是特定于旋转的维度。这可能是由于情境依赖的表现和人际/专业行为,不同于基于测试的知识。这些发现对项目和利益相关者具有启示意义。未来的工作应该检查环境和评估者的影响,并纳入其他非认知领域。
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
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
109
×
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
小红书