观察性工作场所评估模式在澳大利亚职业全科实践培训中的教育效用:一项横断面研究。

IF 2.7 2区 医学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Alison Fielding, Benjamin Mundy, Amanda Tapley, Sarah Gani, Rula Ali, Michael Bentley, Rachael Boland, Lina Zbaidi, Elizabeth Holliday, Jean Ball, Mieke van Driel, Linda Klein, Parker Magin
{"title":"观察性工作场所评估模式在澳大利亚职业全科实践培训中的教育效用:一项横断面研究。","authors":"Alison Fielding, Benjamin Mundy, Amanda Tapley, Sarah Gani, Rula Ali, Michael Bentley, Rachael Boland, Lina Zbaidi, Elizabeth Holliday, Jean Ball, Mieke van Driel, Linda Klein, Parker Magin","doi":"10.1186/s12909-025-07328-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Direct observation, workplace-based assessments (WBAs) are a fundamental component of competency-based postgraduate medical education. In Australian general practice vocational training, external clinical teaching visits (ECTVs) are key observation-based WBAs. Traditionally, ECTVs are conducted face-to-face, but the COVID-19 pandemic saw the development and implementation of remote ECTV modalities. It remains unknown if perceived educational utility of remote ECTVs differs from traditional face-to-face ECTVs. This study explored the educational utility of ECTVs, including face-to-face and remote formats.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>General practice trainees ('registrars') and external clinical teaching visitors ('ECT visitors', who are independent experienced GP observers) each completed a cross-sectional questionnaire following individual ECTVs undertaken in 2020. Outcomes included overall educational utility of the ECTV as perceived by registrars, registrar ratings of likelihood to change their clinical practice as a result of the ECTV, registrar ratings of likelihood to change their approach to learning/training as a result of the ECTV, and overall educational utility of the ECTV as perceived by the ECT visitor. Educational utility ratings (5-point scales) were analysed descriptively. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression were employed to examine factors associated with dichotomised educational utility ratings.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Response rates were 41% (n = 801) for registrars and 39% (n = 742) for ECT visitors. Most registrars (64.1%) rated ECTV overall educational utility as 'very useful'; 58.5% and 47.9% of registrars rated their likelihood to change practice and approach to learning/training, respectively, as 'very likely'. No statistically significant differences in perceived educational utility ratings were identified between face-to-face and remote video/phone ECTVs (multivariable p-value range: .07-.96). Receiving feedback that was focused/specific/easy to translate into action was consistently associated with registrars' rating overall educational utility as 'very useful' (odds ratio (OR): 12.8, 95% confidence interval (CI): 8.26 to19.9), rating likelihood to change practice as 'very likely' (OR: 2.5, 95%CI: 1.59 to 3.94), and rating likelihood to change learning/training approach as 'very likely' (OR: 3.19, 95%CI: 1.97 to 5.17).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>ECTVs are perceived by registrars and ECT visitors to be educationally useful across different delivery modalities and formats. The quality and features of the feedback provided appear most important in ECTVs as an assessment for learning.</p>","PeriodicalId":51234,"journal":{"name":"BMC Medical Education","volume":"25 1","pages":"762"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12102905/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Educational utility of observational workplace-based assessment modalities in Australian vocational general practice training: a cross-sectional study.\",\"authors\":\"Alison Fielding, Benjamin Mundy, Amanda Tapley, Sarah Gani, Rula Ali, Michael Bentley, Rachael Boland, Lina Zbaidi, Elizabeth Holliday, Jean Ball, Mieke van Driel, Linda Klein, Parker Magin\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12909-025-07328-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Direct observation, workplace-based assessments (WBAs) are a fundamental component of competency-based postgraduate medical education. In Australian general practice vocational training, external clinical teaching visits (ECTVs) are key observation-based WBAs. Traditionally, ECTVs are conducted face-to-face, but the COVID-19 pandemic saw the development and implementation of remote ECTV modalities. It remains unknown if perceived educational utility of remote ECTVs differs from traditional face-to-face ECTVs. This study explored the educational utility of ECTVs, including face-to-face and remote formats.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>General practice trainees ('registrars') and external clinical teaching visitors ('ECT visitors', who are independent experienced GP observers) each completed a cross-sectional questionnaire following individual ECTVs undertaken in 2020. Outcomes included overall educational utility of the ECTV as perceived by registrars, registrar ratings of likelihood to change their clinical practice as a result of the ECTV, registrar ratings of likelihood to change their approach to learning/training as a result of the ECTV, and overall educational utility of the ECTV as perceived by the ECT visitor. Educational utility ratings (5-point scales) were analysed descriptively. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression were employed to examine factors associated with dichotomised educational utility ratings.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Response rates were 41% (n = 801) for registrars and 39% (n = 742) for ECT visitors. Most registrars (64.1%) rated ECTV overall educational utility as 'very useful'; 58.5% and 47.9% of registrars rated their likelihood to change practice and approach to learning/training, respectively, as 'very likely'. No statistically significant differences in perceived educational utility ratings were identified between face-to-face and remote video/phone ECTVs (multivariable p-value range: .07-.96). Receiving feedback that was focused/specific/easy to translate into action was consistently associated with registrars' rating overall educational utility as 'very useful' (odds ratio (OR): 12.8, 95% confidence interval (CI): 8.26 to19.9), rating likelihood to change practice as 'very likely' (OR: 2.5, 95%CI: 1.59 to 3.94), and rating likelihood to change learning/training approach as 'very likely' (OR: 3.19, 95%CI: 1.97 to 5.17).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>ECTVs are perceived by registrars and ECT visitors to be educationally useful across different delivery modalities and formats. The quality and features of the feedback provided appear most important in ECTVs as an assessment for learning.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51234,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Medical Education\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"762\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12102905/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Medical Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-025-07328-y\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Medical Education","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-025-07328-y","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:直接观察、基于工作场所的评估(WBAs)是基于能力的研究生医学教育的一个基本组成部分。在澳大利亚的全科职业培训中,外部临床教学访问(ectv)是基于观察的关键wba。传统上,ECTV是面对面进行的,但在2019冠状病毒病大流行期间,开发和实施了远程ECTV模式。目前尚不清楚远程ectv的感知教育效用是否与传统的面对面ectv不同。本研究探讨了ectv的教育效用,包括面对面和远程格式。方法:全科实习生(“注册员”)和外部临床教学访问者(“ECT访问者”,他们是独立的有经验的全科医生观察员)在2020年进行的个别ectv之后,每人完成一份横断面问卷。结果包括注册者感知到的ECTV的整体教育效用,注册者因ECTV而改变其临床实践的可能性评级,注册者因ECTV而改变其学习/培训方法的可能性评级,以及ECT来访者感知到的ECTV的整体教育效用。对教育效用评分(5分制)进行描述性分析。采用单变量和多变量逻辑回归来检验与二元教育效用评分相关的因素。结果:登记员的应答率为41% (n = 801), ECT来访者的应答率为39% (n = 742)。大多数注册商(64.1%)认为ECTV整体教育效用“非常有用”;分别有58.5%和47.9%的注册商将他们改变实践和学习/培训方法的可能性评为“非常有可能”。在面对面和远程视频/电话ectv之间,感知教育效用评级没有统计学上的显著差异(多变量p值范围:0.07 - 0.96)。接收集中/具体/易于转化为行动的反馈始终与注册者将整体教育效用评为“非常有用”(比值比(OR): 12.8, 95%置信区间(CI): 8.26至19.9),将改变实践的可能性评为“非常可能”(OR: 2.5, 95%CI: 1.59至3.94)以及将改变学习/培训方法的可能性评为“非常可能”(OR: 3.19, 95%CI: 1.97至5.17)相关。结论:登记员和ECT来访者认为ectv在不同的交付方式和格式中都具有教育意义。所提供的反馈的质量和特征在ectv中作为学习评估最重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Educational utility of observational workplace-based assessment modalities in Australian vocational general practice training: a cross-sectional study.

Background: Direct observation, workplace-based assessments (WBAs) are a fundamental component of competency-based postgraduate medical education. In Australian general practice vocational training, external clinical teaching visits (ECTVs) are key observation-based WBAs. Traditionally, ECTVs are conducted face-to-face, but the COVID-19 pandemic saw the development and implementation of remote ECTV modalities. It remains unknown if perceived educational utility of remote ECTVs differs from traditional face-to-face ECTVs. This study explored the educational utility of ECTVs, including face-to-face and remote formats.

Methods: General practice trainees ('registrars') and external clinical teaching visitors ('ECT visitors', who are independent experienced GP observers) each completed a cross-sectional questionnaire following individual ECTVs undertaken in 2020. Outcomes included overall educational utility of the ECTV as perceived by registrars, registrar ratings of likelihood to change their clinical practice as a result of the ECTV, registrar ratings of likelihood to change their approach to learning/training as a result of the ECTV, and overall educational utility of the ECTV as perceived by the ECT visitor. Educational utility ratings (5-point scales) were analysed descriptively. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression were employed to examine factors associated with dichotomised educational utility ratings.

Results: Response rates were 41% (n = 801) for registrars and 39% (n = 742) for ECT visitors. Most registrars (64.1%) rated ECTV overall educational utility as 'very useful'; 58.5% and 47.9% of registrars rated their likelihood to change practice and approach to learning/training, respectively, as 'very likely'. No statistically significant differences in perceived educational utility ratings were identified between face-to-face and remote video/phone ECTVs (multivariable p-value range: .07-.96). Receiving feedback that was focused/specific/easy to translate into action was consistently associated with registrars' rating overall educational utility as 'very useful' (odds ratio (OR): 12.8, 95% confidence interval (CI): 8.26 to19.9), rating likelihood to change practice as 'very likely' (OR: 2.5, 95%CI: 1.59 to 3.94), and rating likelihood to change learning/training approach as 'very likely' (OR: 3.19, 95%CI: 1.97 to 5.17).

Conclusions: ECTVs are perceived by registrars and ECT visitors to be educationally useful across different delivery modalities and formats. The quality and features of the feedback provided appear most important in ECTVs as an assessment for learning.

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
BMC Medical Education
BMC Medical Education EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES-
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
11.10%
发文量
795
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: BMC Medical Education is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in relation to the training of healthcare professionals, including undergraduate, postgraduate, and continuing education. The journal has a special focus on curriculum development, evaluations of performance, assessment of training needs and evidence-based medicine.
×
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