评价评价:以定性分析了解医院医学教师评价项目。

IF 2.3 4区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Anupama Goyal MD, MHP, MBA, Shrestha Sachita MPH, David Bozaan MD, Trevor Denton DPT, Stephanie Taylor MD, MSc
{"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 MD, MHP, MBA,&nbsp;Shrestha Sachita MPH,&nbsp;David Bozaan MD,&nbsp;Trevor Denton DPT,&nbsp;Stephanie Taylor MD, MSc","doi":"10.1002/jhm.70028","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<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":15883,"journal":{"name":"Journal of hospital medicine","volume":"20 10","pages":"1087-1091"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://shmpublications.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jhm.70028","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating the evaluation: A qualitative analysis to understand faculty evaluation programs in hospital medicine\",\"authors\":\"Anupama Goyal MD, MHP, MBA,&nbsp;Shrestha Sachita MPH,&nbsp;David Bozaan MD,&nbsp;Trevor Denton DPT,&nbsp;Stephanie Taylor MD, MSc\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/jhm.70028\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<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\":15883,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of hospital medicine\",\"volume\":\"20 10\",\"pages\":\"1087-1091\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://shmpublications.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jhm.70028\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of hospital medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://shmpublications.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jhm.70028\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of hospital medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://shmpublications.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jhm.70028","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我们对学术医疗中心的医院医生绩效评估的结构和期望结果知之甚少。我们进行了一项多中心开放式调查研究,采用理论指导的定性分析来总结成功的医院医学(HM)教师评估计划的基本组成部分和关键结果。107位HM领导人中有22位(20.6%)回应了调查。经常确定的投入是人力、组织和财政资源。评估的主要领域是临床表现和教学。绩效评估或自我评估表格是最常用的评估工具。一半的受访者强调,教师的赞赏是评估的主要产出。重要的教师水平成果是学术提升,而保留和教师参与是显著的组织成果。我们的多站点研究确定了塑造成功的HM教师评估过程的实施和维护的重要途径。这些发现为评估和改进教师评估项目提供了一个战略框架。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Evaluating the evaluation: A qualitative analysis to understand faculty evaluation programs in hospital medicine

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.

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
Journal of hospital medicine
Journal of hospital medicine 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
11.50%
发文量
233
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: JHM is a peer-reviewed publication of the Society of Hospital Medicine and is published 12 times per year. JHM publishes manuscripts that address the care of hospitalized adults or children. Broad areas of interest include (1) Treatments for common inpatient conditions; (2) Approaches to improving perioperative care; (3) Improving care for hospitalized patients with geriatric or pediatric vulnerabilities (such as mobility problems, or those with complex longitudinal care); (4) Evaluation of innovative healthcare delivery or educational models; (5) Approaches to improving the quality, safety, and value of healthcare across the acute- and postacute-continuum of care; and (6) Evaluation of policy and payment changes that affect hospital and postacute care.
×
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