首页> 外文期刊>JAMA: the Journal of the American Medical Association >Tools for direct observation and assessment of clinical skills of medical trainees: a systematic review.
【24h】

Tools for direct observation and assessment of clinical skills of medical trainees: a systematic review.

机译:直接观察和评估医学实习生临床技能的工具:系统评价。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

CONTEXT: Direct observation of medical trainees with actual patients is important for performance-based clinical skills assessment. Multiple tools for direct observation are available, but their characteristics and outcomes have not been compared systematically. OBJECTIVES: To identify observation tools used to assess medical trainees' clinical skills with actual patients and to summarize the evidence of their validity and outcomes. DATA SOURCES: Electronic literature search of PubMed, ERIC, CINAHL, and Web of Science for English-language articles published between 1965 and March 2009 and review of references from article bibliographies. STUDY SELECTION: Included studies described a tool designed for direct observation of medical trainees' clinical skills with actual patients by educational supervisors. Tools used only in simulated settings or assessing surgical/procedural skills were excluded. Of 10 672 citations, 199 articles were reviewed and 85 met inclusion criteria. DATA EXTRACTION: Two authors independently abstracted studies using a modified Best Evidence Medical Education coding form to inform judgment of key psychometric characteristics. Differences were reconciled by consensus. RESULTS: A total of 55 tools were identified. Twenty-one tools were studied with students and 32 with residents or fellows. Two were used across the educational continuum. Most (n = 32) were developed for formative assessment. Rater training was described for 26 tools. Only 11 tools had validity evidence based on internal structure and relationship to other variables. Trainee or observer attitudes about the tool were the most commonly measured outcomes. Self-assessed changes in trainee knowledge, skills, or attitudes (n = 9) or objectively measured change in knowledge or skills (n = 5) were infrequently reported. The strongest validity evidence has been established for the Mini Clinical Evaluation Exercise (Mini-CEX). CONCLUSION: Although many tools are available for the direct observation of clinical skills, validity evidence and description of educational outcomes are scarce.
机译:语境:直接与实际患者进行医学观察对基于绩效的临床技能评估非常重要。可以使用多种直接观察工具,但是尚未系统比较它们的特征和结果。目的:确定观察工具,以评估医学实习生与实际患者的临床技能,并总结其有效性和结果的证据。数据来源:检索PubMed,ERIC,CINAHL和Web of Science的电子文献,以检索1965年至2009年3月之间的英语文章,并复习文献书目的参考文献。研究选择:包括的研究描述了一种工具,旨在由教育主管直接观察实际患者的医学研修生的临床技能。排除了仅用于模拟设置或评估手术/程序技能​​的工具。在10672次引用中,有199条被审查,其中85条符合纳入标准。数据提取:两位作者使用改良的“最佳证据医学教育”编码形式对研究进行了独立摘要,以提供对关键心理计量学特征的判断。分歧通过协商一致得到解决。结果:总共确定了55种工具。与学生一起研究了21种工具,与居民或研究员一起研究了32种工具。在整个教育过程中使用了两次。大多数(n = 32)被开发用于形成性评估。描述了针对26种工具的评估者培训。基于内部结构以及与其他变量的关系,只有11种工具具有有效性证据。学员或观察者对工具的态度是最常衡量的结果。很少报告受训者知识,技能或态度的自我评估变化(n = 9)或客观测量的知识或技能变化(n = 5)。迷你临床评估练习(Mini-CEX)已建立了最强的有效性证据。结论:尽管有许多工具可用于直接观察临床技能,但仍缺乏有效性证据和对教育成果的描述。

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