Development, Validation, and Implementation of a Medical Judgment Metric.

IF 1.7
MDM policy & practice Pub Date : 2017-06-19 eCollection Date: 2017-01-01 DOI:10.1177/2381468317715262
Rami A Ahmed, Michele L McCarroll, Alan Schwartz, M David Gothard, S Scott Atkinson, Patrick G Hughes, Jose Ramon Cepeda Brito, Lori Assad, Jerry G Myers, Richard L George
{"title":"Development, Validation, and Implementation of a Medical Judgment Metric.","authors":"Rami A Ahmed,&nbsp;Michele L McCarroll,&nbsp;Alan Schwartz,&nbsp;M David Gothard,&nbsp;S Scott Atkinson,&nbsp;Patrick G Hughes,&nbsp;Jose Ramon Cepeda Brito,&nbsp;Lori Assad,&nbsp;Jerry G Myers,&nbsp;Richard L George","doi":"10.1177/2381468317715262","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Medical decision making is a critical, yet understudied, aspect of medical education. <b>Aims:</b> To develop the Medical Judgment Metric (MJM), a numerical rubric to quantify good decisions in practice in simulated environments; and to obtain initial preliminary evidence of reliability and validity of the tool. <b>Methods:</b> The individual MJM items, domains, and sections of the MJM were built based on existing standardized frameworks. Content validity was determined by a convenient sample of eight experts. The MJM instrument was pilot tested in four medical simulations with a team of three medical raters assessing 40 participants with four levels of medical experience and skill. <b>Results:</b> Raters were highly consistent in their MJM scores in each scenario (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.965 to 0.987) as well as their evaluation of the expected patient outcome (Fleiss's Kappa 0.791 to 0.906). For each simulation scenario, average rater cut-scores significantly predicted expected loss of life or stabilization (Cohen's Kappa 0.851 to 0.880). <b>Discussion</b>: The MJM demonstrated preliminary evidence of reliability and validity.</p>","PeriodicalId":520707,"journal":{"name":"MDM policy & practice","volume":" ","pages":"2381468317715262"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2017-06-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/2381468317715262","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"MDM policy & practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2381468317715262","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2017/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Background: Medical decision making is a critical, yet understudied, aspect of medical education. Aims: To develop the Medical Judgment Metric (MJM), a numerical rubric to quantify good decisions in practice in simulated environments; and to obtain initial preliminary evidence of reliability and validity of the tool. Methods: The individual MJM items, domains, and sections of the MJM were built based on existing standardized frameworks. Content validity was determined by a convenient sample of eight experts. The MJM instrument was pilot tested in four medical simulations with a team of three medical raters assessing 40 participants with four levels of medical experience and skill. Results: Raters were highly consistent in their MJM scores in each scenario (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.965 to 0.987) as well as their evaluation of the expected patient outcome (Fleiss's Kappa 0.791 to 0.906). For each simulation scenario, average rater cut-scores significantly predicted expected loss of life or stabilization (Cohen's Kappa 0.851 to 0.880). Discussion: The MJM demonstrated preliminary evidence of reliability and validity.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

医学判断度量标准的开发、验证和实施。
背景:医学决策是医学教育中一个重要但尚未得到充分研究的方面。目的:建立医学判断度量(MJM),这是一种量化模拟环境中实践中良好决策的数值准则;并获得该工具的可靠性和有效性的初步证据。方法:基于现有的标准化框架构建MJM的各个项目、领域和部分。内容效度由8位专家组成的方便样本确定。MJM仪器在四次医疗模拟中进行了试点测试,由三名医疗评估员组成的小组对40名具有四级医疗经验和技能的参与者进行了评估。结果:评分者在各情景下的MJM评分(类内相关系数0.965 ~ 0.987)以及对患者预期结局的评价(Fleiss’s Kappa 0.791 ~ 0.906)高度一致。对于每个模拟场景,平均评分cut-score显著预测预期的生命损失或稳定(Cohen's Kappa 0.851至0.880)。讨论:MJM初步证明了信度和效度。
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