教育研究:全国癫痫医师在职考试的质量与效度证据

Jeremy Moeller, Ernesto Gonzalez-Giraldo, France W. Fung, Emily L. Johnson, Ammar Kheder, Jane MacLean, Emily L. McGinnis, Wolfgang G. Muhlhofer, Joel M. Oster, Sarah Schmitt, P. Emanuela Voinescu, Lily C. Wong-Kisiel, Kandice J. Kidd, Amy Kephart, Fred A. Lado, Sudha Kilaru Kessler
{"title":"教育研究:全国癫痫医师在职考试的质量与效度证据","authors":"Jeremy Moeller, Ernesto Gonzalez-Giraldo, France W. Fung, Emily L. Johnson, Ammar Kheder, Jane MacLean, Emily L. McGinnis, Wolfgang G. Muhlhofer, Joel M. Oster, Sarah Schmitt, P. Emanuela Voinescu, Lily C. Wong-Kisiel, Kandice J. Kidd, Amy Kephart, Fred A. Lado, Sudha Kilaru Kessler","doi":"10.1212/ne9.0000000000200090","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background and Objectives Epilepsy education has been transformed over the past 2 decades, leading to a need for structured formative assessment tools. The American Epilepsy Society developed the Epilepsy Fellowship In-Training Examination (EpiFITE) to provide high-quality formative assessment for fellows, to stimulate program improvement, and to guide future learning and teaching. The aim of this study was to explore validity evidence for the EpiFITE in meeting these goals. Methods Validity evidence was sought from multiple sources. The content of the examination was linked to the American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology blueprint for initial certification in epilepsy, and items were developed by trained experts. Internal structure was studied using internal consistency and item analysis. Surveys of fellows and fellowship directors focused on the examination experience (response process) and how results influenced fellow assessment, future learning, and program improvement (relationship to other variables and consequences). Results The EpiFITE was first administered in 2020, with 172 examinees from 67 programs. By 2022 (year 3), the EpiFITE was completed by 195 epilepsy fellows from 77 programs. The overall mean score of the examination was stable from year to year, and the committee predicted the difficulty of individual items with a high degree of accuracy. The examination had high internal consistency (Cronbach α 0.76–0.81). The median item discrimination index ranged from 0.17 in 2020 to 0.21 in 2022. Discrimination indices were lower (mean ≤0.10) for items that were either very easy or very difficult and significantly higher (mean >0.20) for other items. Program directors and epilepsy fellows agreed the examination questions were appropriate and agreed that the EpiFITE helped them identify areas for self-directed learning. Program directors also found the examination helpful in identifying areas of strength and areas for improvement within their programs. Discussion There are several sources of evidence of the quality and validity of the EpiFITE. By exploring this validity evidence, we have identified several best practices in the development and evaluation of a subspecialty examination, and this experience could be helpful for developers of in-training examinations in other subspecialties.","PeriodicalId":496615,"journal":{"name":"Neurology Education","volume":"35 2","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Education Research: Quality and Validity Evidence for a National In-Training Examination for Epilepsy Fellows\",\"authors\":\"Jeremy Moeller, Ernesto Gonzalez-Giraldo, France W. Fung, Emily L. Johnson, Ammar Kheder, Jane MacLean, Emily L. McGinnis, Wolfgang G. Muhlhofer, Joel M. Oster, Sarah Schmitt, P. Emanuela Voinescu, Lily C. Wong-Kisiel, Kandice J. Kidd, Amy Kephart, Fred A. Lado, Sudha Kilaru Kessler\",\"doi\":\"10.1212/ne9.0000000000200090\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background and Objectives Epilepsy education has been transformed over the past 2 decades, leading to a need for structured formative assessment tools. The American Epilepsy Society developed the Epilepsy Fellowship In-Training Examination (EpiFITE) to provide high-quality formative assessment for fellows, to stimulate program improvement, and to guide future learning and teaching. The aim of this study was to explore validity evidence for the EpiFITE in meeting these goals. Methods Validity evidence was sought from multiple sources. The content of the examination was linked to the American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology blueprint for initial certification in epilepsy, and items were developed by trained experts. Internal structure was studied using internal consistency and item analysis. Surveys of fellows and fellowship directors focused on the examination experience (response process) and how results influenced fellow assessment, future learning, and program improvement (relationship to other variables and consequences). Results The EpiFITE was first administered in 2020, with 172 examinees from 67 programs. By 2022 (year 3), the EpiFITE was completed by 195 epilepsy fellows from 77 programs. The overall mean score of the examination was stable from year to year, and the committee predicted the difficulty of individual items with a high degree of accuracy. The examination had high internal consistency (Cronbach α 0.76–0.81). The median item discrimination index ranged from 0.17 in 2020 to 0.21 in 2022. Discrimination indices were lower (mean ≤0.10) for items that were either very easy or very difficult and significantly higher (mean >0.20) for other items. Program directors and epilepsy fellows agreed the examination questions were appropriate and agreed that the EpiFITE helped them identify areas for self-directed learning. Program directors also found the examination helpful in identifying areas of strength and areas for improvement within their programs. Discussion There are several sources of evidence of the quality and validity of the EpiFITE. By exploring this validity evidence, we have identified several best practices in the development and evaluation of a subspecialty examination, and this experience could be helpful for developers of in-training examinations in other subspecialties.\",\"PeriodicalId\":496615,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Neurology Education\",\"volume\":\"35 2\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Neurology Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1212/ne9.0000000000200090\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurology Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1212/ne9.0000000000200090","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

背景和目的癫痫教育在过去二十年中发生了转变,导致需要结构化的形成性评估工具。美国癫痫协会制定了癫痫奖学金培训考试(EpiFITE),为研究员提供高质量的形成性评估,促进项目改进,并指导未来的学习和教学。本研究的目的是探索EpiFITE满足这些目标的有效性证据。方法从多方寻求效度证据。检查内容与美国精神病学和神经病学委员会癫痫初步认证蓝图相关联,项目由训练有素的专家制定。内部结构研究采用内部一致性和项目分析。对研究员和研究员主任的调查侧重于考试经验(反应过程)以及结果如何影响研究员的评估、未来的学习和项目改进(与其他变量和结果的关系)。EpiFITE于2020年首次实施,共有来自67个项目的172名考生参加。到2022年(第三年),来自77个项目的195名癫痫研究员完成了EpiFITE。考试的总体平均分每年都很稳定,委员会对个别题目难度的预测准确度很高。检查具有较高的内部一致性(Cronbach α 0.76-0.81)。项目歧视指数中位数在2020年的0.17至2022年的0.21之间。极易题和极难题的鉴别指数较低(平均≤0.10),其他题的鉴别指数显著较高(平均>0.20)。项目主管和癫痫研究员都认为考试题目是合适的,并认为EpiFITE帮助他们确定了自主学习的领域。项目主管还发现,该考试有助于确定项目的优势领域和需要改进的领域。关于EpiFITE的质量和有效性,有几个证据来源。通过对有效性证据的探索,我们确定了亚专科考试开发和评估的几个最佳实践,这些经验可以为其他亚专科培训考试的开发者提供帮助。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Education Research: Quality and Validity Evidence for a National In-Training Examination for Epilepsy Fellows
Background and Objectives Epilepsy education has been transformed over the past 2 decades, leading to a need for structured formative assessment tools. The American Epilepsy Society developed the Epilepsy Fellowship In-Training Examination (EpiFITE) to provide high-quality formative assessment for fellows, to stimulate program improvement, and to guide future learning and teaching. The aim of this study was to explore validity evidence for the EpiFITE in meeting these goals. Methods Validity evidence was sought from multiple sources. The content of the examination was linked to the American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology blueprint for initial certification in epilepsy, and items were developed by trained experts. Internal structure was studied using internal consistency and item analysis. Surveys of fellows and fellowship directors focused on the examination experience (response process) and how results influenced fellow assessment, future learning, and program improvement (relationship to other variables and consequences). Results The EpiFITE was first administered in 2020, with 172 examinees from 67 programs. By 2022 (year 3), the EpiFITE was completed by 195 epilepsy fellows from 77 programs. The overall mean score of the examination was stable from year to year, and the committee predicted the difficulty of individual items with a high degree of accuracy. The examination had high internal consistency (Cronbach α 0.76–0.81). The median item discrimination index ranged from 0.17 in 2020 to 0.21 in 2022. Discrimination indices were lower (mean ≤0.10) for items that were either very easy or very difficult and significantly higher (mean >0.20) for other items. Program directors and epilepsy fellows agreed the examination questions were appropriate and agreed that the EpiFITE helped them identify areas for self-directed learning. Program directors also found the examination helpful in identifying areas of strength and areas for improvement within their programs. Discussion There are several sources of evidence of the quality and validity of the EpiFITE. By exploring this validity evidence, we have identified several best practices in the development and evaluation of a subspecialty examination, and this experience could be helpful for developers of in-training examinations in other subspecialties.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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