Anupama Goyal, Shrestha Sachita, David Bozaan, Trevor Denton, Stephanie Taylor
{"title":"评价评价:以定性分析了解医院医学教师评价项目。","authors":"Anupama Goyal, Shrestha Sachita, David Bozaan, Trevor Denton, Stephanie Taylor","doi":"10.1002/jhm.70028","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Little is known about the structure and desired outcomes of hospitalist performance evaluations at academic medical centers. We conducted a multicenter open-ended survey study with theory-guided qualitative analysis to summarize essential components and key outcomes for successful hospital medicine (HM) faculty evaluation programs. Twenty-two of 107 (20.6%) HM leaders responded to the survey. Frequently identified inputs were human, organizational, and financial resources. The main areas of evaluation were clinical performance and teaching. Performance evaluation or self-assessment forms were the most often utilized evaluation tools. Half of the respondents highlighted faculty appreciation as a main output of the evaluation. Important faculty-level outcomes were academic promotion, while retention and faculty engagement were salient organizational outcomes. Our multi-site study identified important pathways that shape the implementation and maintenance of successful HM faculty evaluation processes. These findings provide a strategic framework for evaluating and refining faculty evaluation programs over time.</p>","PeriodicalId":94084,"journal":{"name":"Journal of hospital medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating the evaluation: A qualitative analysis to understand faculty evaluation programs in hospital medicine.\",\"authors\":\"Anupama Goyal, Shrestha Sachita, David Bozaan, Trevor Denton, Stephanie Taylor\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/jhm.70028\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Little is known about the structure and desired outcomes of hospitalist performance evaluations at academic medical centers. We conducted a multicenter open-ended survey study with theory-guided qualitative analysis to summarize essential components and key outcomes for successful hospital medicine (HM) faculty evaluation programs. Twenty-two of 107 (20.6%) HM leaders responded to the survey. Frequently identified inputs were human, organizational, and financial resources. The main areas of evaluation were clinical performance and teaching. Performance evaluation or self-assessment forms were the most often utilized evaluation tools. Half of the respondents highlighted faculty appreciation as a main output of the evaluation. Important faculty-level outcomes were academic promotion, while retention and faculty engagement were salient organizational outcomes. Our multi-site study identified important pathways that shape the implementation and maintenance of successful HM faculty evaluation processes. These findings provide a strategic framework for evaluating and refining faculty evaluation programs over time.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94084,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of hospital medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of hospital medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/jhm.70028\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of hospital medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jhm.70028","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Evaluating the evaluation: A qualitative analysis to understand faculty evaluation programs in hospital medicine.
Little is known about the structure and desired outcomes of hospitalist performance evaluations at academic medical centers. We conducted a multicenter open-ended survey study with theory-guided qualitative analysis to summarize essential components and key outcomes for successful hospital medicine (HM) faculty evaluation programs. Twenty-two of 107 (20.6%) HM leaders responded to the survey. Frequently identified inputs were human, organizational, and financial resources. The main areas of evaluation were clinical performance and teaching. Performance evaluation or self-assessment forms were the most often utilized evaluation tools. Half of the respondents highlighted faculty appreciation as a main output of the evaluation. Important faculty-level outcomes were academic promotion, while retention and faculty engagement were salient organizational outcomes. Our multi-site study identified important pathways that shape the implementation and maintenance of successful HM faculty evaluation processes. These findings provide a strategic framework for evaluating and refining faculty evaluation programs over time.