首页> 外文期刊>BMC Medical Education >Holistic rubric vs. analytic rubric for measuring clinical performance levels in medical students
【24h】

Holistic rubric vs. analytic rubric for measuring clinical performance levels in medical students

机译:整体量标与分析标题测量医学生的临床性能水平

获取原文
       

摘要

Task-specific checklists, holistic rubrics, and analytic rubrics are often used for performance assessments. We examined what factors evaluators consider important in holistic scoring of clinical performance assessment, and compared the usefulness of applying holistic and analytic rubrics respectively, and analytic rubrics in addition to task-specific checklists based on traditional standards. We compared the usefulness of a holistic rubric versus an analytic rubric in effectively measuring the clinical skill performances of 126 third-year medical students who participated in a clinical performance assessment conducted by Pusan National University School of Medicine. We conducted a questionnaire survey of 37 evaluators who used all three evaluation methods—holistic rubric, analytic rubric, and task-specific checklist—for each student. The relationship between the scores on the three evaluation methods was analyzed using Pearson’s correlation. Inter-rater agreement was analyzed by Kappa index. The effect of holistic and analytic rubric scores on the task-specific checklist score was analyzed using multiple regression analysis. Evaluators perceived accuracy and proficiency to be major factors in objective structured clinical examinations evaluation, and history taking and physical examination to be major factors in clinical performance examinations evaluation. Holistic rubric scores were highly related to the scores of the task-specific checklist and analytic rubric. Relatively low agreement was found in clinical performance examinations compared to objective structured clinical examinations. Meanwhile, the holistic and analytic rubric scores explained 59.1% of the task-specific checklist score in objective structured clinical examinations and 51.6% in clinical performance examinations. The results show the usefulness of holistic and analytic rubrics in clinical performance assessment, which can be used in conjunction with task-specific checklists for more efficient evaluation.
机译:任务特定的清单,整体rubrics和分析尺寸通常用于性能评估。我们研究了什么因素评估员在临床绩效评估的整体评分中考虑重要,并比较了整体和分析尺度的有用性,以及根据传统标准的任务特定检查表,分析数据分析。我们比较了整体标题与分析专栏的有用性,有效地测量了126名第三年医学生的临床技能表演,他们参与了普苏国家大学医学院进行了临床绩效评估。我们对37项评估员进行了调查问卷调查,这些评估员使用了所有三种评估方法 - 整体规验,分析标题和任务特定的检查表 - 为每个学生进行。使用Pearson的相关分析了三种评估方法的分数之间的关系。 κ指数分析了评估间协议。使用多元回归分析分析了整体和分析专栏分数对特定任务核对表分数的影响。评估人员感知准确性和熟练程度是客观结构化临床检查评估的主要因素,以及历史服用和体检是临床绩效考试评估的主要因素。整体专栏分数与任务特定的清单和分析标题的分数高度相关。与客观结构化临床检查相比,在临床表现考试中发现了比较低的协议。同时,整体和分析资料评分解释了目标结构化临床检查的任务特定清单评分的59.1%,临床绩效考试中的51.6%。结果表明,整体和分析尺码在临床表现评估中的有用性,可与任务特定的清单结合使用,以获得更有效的评估。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号