Tobias Tessmann, Adrian P Marty, Daniel Stricker, Sören Huwendiek, Jan Breckwoldt
{"title":"对于频繁的基于工作场所的评估来说,没有“太小”的问题:当使用移动应用程序评估EPAs时,大型和小型麻醉住院医师项目之间存在差异。","authors":"Tobias Tessmann, Adrian P Marty, Daniel Stricker, Sören Huwendiek, Jan Breckwoldt","doi":"10.3205/zma001709","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>A competency-based education approach calls for frequent workplace-based assessments (WBA) of Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs). While mobile applications increase the efficiency, it is not known how many assessments are required for reliable ratings and whether the concept can be implemented in all sizes of residency programs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Over 5 months, a mobile app was used to assess 10 different EPAs in daily clinical routine in Swiss anesthesia departments. The data from large residency programs was compared to those from smaller ones. We applied generalizability theory and decision studies to estimate the minimum number of assessments needed for reliable assessments.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From 28 residency programs, we included 3936 assessments by 306 supervisors for 295 residents. The median number of assessments per trainee was 8, with a median of 4 different EPAs assessed by 3 different supervisors. We found no statistically significant differences between large and small programs in the number of assessments per trainee, per supervisor, per EPA, the agreement between supervisors and trainees, and the number of feedback processes stimulated. The average \"level of supervision\" (LoS, scale from 1 to 5) recorded in larger programs was 3.2 (SD 0.5) compared to 2.7 (SD 0.4) (p<0.05). To achieve a g-coefficient >0.7, at least a random set of 3 different EPAs needed to be assessed, with each EPA rated at least 4 times by 4 different supervisors, resulting in a total of 12 assessments.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Frequent WBAs of EPAs were feasible in large and small residency programs. We found no significant differences in the number of assessments performed. The minimum number of assessments required for a g-coefficient >0.7 was attainable in large and small residency programs.</p>","PeriodicalId":45850,"journal":{"name":"GMS Journal for Medical Education","volume":"41 5","pages":"Doc54"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11656171/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"There is no \\\"too small\\\" for frequent workplace-based assessment: Differences between large and small residency programs in anesthesia when using a mobile application to assess EPAs.\",\"authors\":\"Tobias Tessmann, Adrian P Marty, Daniel Stricker, Sören Huwendiek, Jan Breckwoldt\",\"doi\":\"10.3205/zma001709\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>A competency-based education approach calls for frequent workplace-based assessments (WBA) of Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs). While mobile applications increase the efficiency, it is not known how many assessments are required for reliable ratings and whether the concept can be implemented in all sizes of residency programs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Over 5 months, a mobile app was used to assess 10 different EPAs in daily clinical routine in Swiss anesthesia departments. The data from large residency programs was compared to those from smaller ones. We applied generalizability theory and decision studies to estimate the minimum number of assessments needed for reliable assessments.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From 28 residency programs, we included 3936 assessments by 306 supervisors for 295 residents. The median number of assessments per trainee was 8, with a median of 4 different EPAs assessed by 3 different supervisors. We found no statistically significant differences between large and small programs in the number of assessments per trainee, per supervisor, per EPA, the agreement between supervisors and trainees, and the number of feedback processes stimulated. The average \\\"level of supervision\\\" (LoS, scale from 1 to 5) recorded in larger programs was 3.2 (SD 0.5) compared to 2.7 (SD 0.4) (p<0.05). To achieve a g-coefficient >0.7, at least a random set of 3 different EPAs needed to be assessed, with each EPA rated at least 4 times by 4 different supervisors, resulting in a total of 12 assessments.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Frequent WBAs of EPAs were feasible in large and small residency programs. We found no significant differences in the number of assessments performed. The minimum number of assessments required for a g-coefficient >0.7 was attainable in large and small residency programs.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45850,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"GMS Journal for Medical Education\",\"volume\":\"41 5\",\"pages\":\"Doc54\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11656171/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"GMS Journal for Medical Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3205/zma001709\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"GMS Journal for Medical Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3205/zma001709","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
There is no "too small" for frequent workplace-based assessment: Differences between large and small residency programs in anesthesia when using a mobile application to assess EPAs.
Background: A competency-based education approach calls for frequent workplace-based assessments (WBA) of Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs). While mobile applications increase the efficiency, it is not known how many assessments are required for reliable ratings and whether the concept can be implemented in all sizes of residency programs.
Methods: Over 5 months, a mobile app was used to assess 10 different EPAs in daily clinical routine in Swiss anesthesia departments. The data from large residency programs was compared to those from smaller ones. We applied generalizability theory and decision studies to estimate the minimum number of assessments needed for reliable assessments.
Results: From 28 residency programs, we included 3936 assessments by 306 supervisors for 295 residents. The median number of assessments per trainee was 8, with a median of 4 different EPAs assessed by 3 different supervisors. We found no statistically significant differences between large and small programs in the number of assessments per trainee, per supervisor, per EPA, the agreement between supervisors and trainees, and the number of feedback processes stimulated. The average "level of supervision" (LoS, scale from 1 to 5) recorded in larger programs was 3.2 (SD 0.5) compared to 2.7 (SD 0.4) (p<0.05). To achieve a g-coefficient >0.7, at least a random set of 3 different EPAs needed to be assessed, with each EPA rated at least 4 times by 4 different supervisors, resulting in a total of 12 assessments.
Conclusion: Frequent WBAs of EPAs were feasible in large and small residency programs. We found no significant differences in the number of assessments performed. The minimum number of assessments required for a g-coefficient >0.7 was attainable in large and small residency programs.
期刊介绍:
GMS Journal for Medical Education (GMS J Med Educ) – formerly GMS Zeitschrift für Medizinische Ausbildung – publishes scientific articles on all aspects of undergraduate and graduate education in medicine, dentistry, veterinary medicine, pharmacy and other health professions. Research and review articles, project reports, short communications as well as discussion papers and comments may be submitted. There is a special focus on empirical studies which are methodologically sound and lead to results that are relevant beyond the respective institution, profession or country. Please feel free to submit qualitative as well as quantitative studies. We especially welcome submissions by students. It is the mission of GMS Journal for Medical Education to contribute to furthering scientific knowledge in the German-speaking countries as well as internationally and thus to foster the improvement of teaching and learning and to build an evidence base for undergraduate and graduate education. To this end, the journal has set up an editorial board with international experts. All manuscripts submitted are subjected to a clearly structured peer review process. All articles are published bilingually in English and German and are available with unrestricted open access. Thus, GMS Journal for Medical Education is available to a broad international readership. GMS Journal for Medical Education is published as an unrestricted open access journal with at least four issues per year. In addition, special issues on current topics in medical education research are also published. Until 2015 the journal was published under its German name GMS Zeitschrift für Medizinische Ausbildung. By changing its name to GMS Journal for Medical Education, we wish to underline our international mission.