Education Research: Moving Beyond "Outstanding": Neurology Program Directors' Perspectives on the MSPE Clerkship Summaries.

Neurology. Education Pub Date : 2026-06-11 eCollection Date: 2026-06-01 DOI:10.1212/NE9.0000000000200319
Robert Thompson Stone, Tamara B Kaplan, Stephen Joseph Powell, Catherine Nicholas, Samantha P Myers, Melanie Braun, Andres Fernandez, Christopher J Mooney
{"title":"Education Research: Moving Beyond \"Outstanding\": Neurology Program Directors' Perspectives on the MSPE Clerkship Summaries.","authors":"Robert Thompson Stone, Tamara B Kaplan, Stephen Joseph Powell, Catherine Nicholas, Samantha P Myers, Melanie Braun, Andres Fernandez, Christopher J Mooney","doi":"10.1212/NE9.0000000000200319","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>As standardized metrics in residency selection change, residency program directors increasingly rely on narrative components of the Medical Student Performance Evaluation (MSPE) clerkship summaries. However, wide variability in structure, language, and transparency limits their usefulness for high-stakes decision making. The aims of this study were to explore neurology and child neurology program directors' perspectives on the utility of MSPE neurology clerkship summaries and to identify features that enhance or undermine their value in residency selection.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a qualitative study using semistructured interviews with US neurology and child neurology residency program directors. Participants reviewed and discussed 4 constructed MSPE neurology clerkship summary cases developed from deidentified authentic MSPE excerpts and designed to reflect variation in structure and content. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis informed by theories of narrative assessment and discourse. Trustworthiness was supported through analytic memos, peer debriefing, and investigator triangulation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirteen program directors participated, and 6 themes emerged: (1) Participants valued honest and transparent narratives but perceived candid discussion of limitations as risky for students; (2) institutional variability in grading systems, access to neurology experiences, and evaluator practices limited fair comparison of applicants; (3) narratives were most useful when clearly structured, concise, and transparent about how evaluations were synthesized; (4) comparative information was viewed as essential for decision making, despite its susceptibility to bias; (5) program directors consistently reported that coded language was difficult to interpret and should be avoided; and (6) nonspecific laudatory comments diminished narrative value, whereas brief, concrete behavioral examples enhanced credibility and interpretability.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Neurology clerkship summaries in the MSPE remain influential yet imperfect tools for residency selection. Program directors favor narratives that are structured and specific and avoid coded or vague language. Targeted faculty development and adoption of shared narrative frameworks represent actionable strategies to improve fairness, clarity, and trust in narrative assessment within neurology education.</p>","PeriodicalId":520085,"journal":{"name":"Neurology. Education","volume":"5 2","pages":"e200319"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13268655/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurology. Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1212/NE9.0000000000200319","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/6/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and objectives: As standardized metrics in residency selection change, residency program directors increasingly rely on narrative components of the Medical Student Performance Evaluation (MSPE) clerkship summaries. However, wide variability in structure, language, and transparency limits their usefulness for high-stakes decision making. The aims of this study were to explore neurology and child neurology program directors' perspectives on the utility of MSPE neurology clerkship summaries and to identify features that enhance or undermine their value in residency selection.

Methods: We conducted a qualitative study using semistructured interviews with US neurology and child neurology residency program directors. Participants reviewed and discussed 4 constructed MSPE neurology clerkship summary cases developed from deidentified authentic MSPE excerpts and designed to reflect variation in structure and content. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis informed by theories of narrative assessment and discourse. Trustworthiness was supported through analytic memos, peer debriefing, and investigator triangulation.

Results: Thirteen program directors participated, and 6 themes emerged: (1) Participants valued honest and transparent narratives but perceived candid discussion of limitations as risky for students; (2) institutional variability in grading systems, access to neurology experiences, and evaluator practices limited fair comparison of applicants; (3) narratives were most useful when clearly structured, concise, and transparent about how evaluations were synthesized; (4) comparative information was viewed as essential for decision making, despite its susceptibility to bias; (5) program directors consistently reported that coded language was difficult to interpret and should be avoided; and (6) nonspecific laudatory comments diminished narrative value, whereas brief, concrete behavioral examples enhanced credibility and interpretability.

Discussion: Neurology clerkship summaries in the MSPE remain influential yet imperfect tools for residency selection. Program directors favor narratives that are structured and specific and avoid coded or vague language. Targeted faculty development and adoption of shared narrative frameworks represent actionable strategies to improve fairness, clarity, and trust in narrative assessment within neurology education.

教育研究:超越“杰出”:神经病学项目主任对MSPE职员摘要的看法。
背景和目的:随着住院医师选择标准的变化,住院医师项目主任越来越依赖医学生绩效评估(MSPE)实习总结的叙述部分。然而,结构、语言和透明度的广泛变化限制了它们在高风险决策中的作用。本研究的目的是探讨神经病学和儿童神经病学项目主任对MSPE神经病学见习总结的效用的看法,并确定其在住院医师选择中增强或削弱价值的特征。方法:我们采用半结构化访谈对美国神经病学和儿童神经病学住院医师项目主任进行了定性研究。参与者回顾并讨论了4个构建的MSPE神经学见习总结案例,这些案例来自于未识别的真实MSPE摘录,旨在反映结构和内容的变化。访谈录音,逐字转录,并使用反身性主题分析,根据叙事评估和话语理论进行分析。可信度通过分析备忘录、同行汇报和调查员三角测量得到支持。结果:13位项目主管参与,并产生了6个主题:(1)参与者重视诚实和透明的叙述,但认为坦率地讨论限制对学生有风险;(2)评分系统的制度差异、获得神经学经验和评估员实践限制了申请人的公平比较;(3)当评价的结构清晰、简洁和透明时,叙述是最有用的;(4)尽管比较信息容易受到偏见的影响,但它仍被视为决策的必要条件;(5)项目主管始终报告编码语言难以解释,应避免使用;(6)非具体的褒义词降低了叙述价值,而简短、具体的行为例子提高了可信度和可解释性。讨论:MSPE中的神经病学见习总结仍然是有影响力的,但不完善的住院医师选择工具。项目主管喜欢结构化和具体的叙述,避免编码或模糊的语言。有针对性的教师发展和采用共享的叙事框架代表了在神经学教育中提高叙事评估公平性、清晰度和信任度的可行策略。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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