首页> 外文期刊>Medical education >Assessing resident's knowledge and communication skills using four different evaluation tools.
【24h】

Assessing resident's knowledge and communication skills using four different evaluation tools.

机译:使用四种不同的评估工具评估居民的知识和沟通技巧。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

This study assesses the relationship between 4 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) outcome project measures for interpersonal and communication skills and medical knowledge; specifically, monthly performance evaluations, objective structured clinical examinations (OSCEs), the American Board of Family Practice in-training examination (ABFP-ITE) and the Davis observation code (DOC) practice style profiles. Based on previous work, we have DOC scoring for 29 residents from the University of California, Davis Department of Family and Community Medicine. For all these residents we also had the results of monthly performance evaluations, 2 required OSCE exercises, and the results of 3 American Board of Family Medicine (ABFM) ITEs. Data for each of these measures were abstracted for each resident. The Pearson correlation coefficient was used to assess the presence or lack of correlation between each of these evaluation methods. There is little correlation between various evaluation methods used to assess medical knowledge, and there is also little correlation between various evaluation methods used to assess communication skills. The outcome project remains a 'work in progress', with the need for larger studies to assess the value of different assessment measures of resident competence. It is unlikely that DOC will become a useful evaluation tool.
机译:这项研究评估了4个研究生医学教育认可委员会(ACGME)成果项目措施中的人际和沟通技能以及医学知识之间的关系;具体来说,包括每月的绩效评估,客观的结构化临床检查(OSCE),美国家庭实践训练委员会(ABFP-ITE)和戴维斯观察法典(DOC)的实践风格简介。根据之前的工作,我们为加州大学戴维斯分校家庭和社区医学系的29位居民提供了DOC评分。对于所有这些居民,我们还获得了每月绩效评估的结果,两次必需的OSCE练习以及三个美国家庭医学委员会(ABFM)ITE的结果。为每个居民提取了这些措施的数据。皮尔逊相关系数用于评估每种评估方法之间是否存在关联。用于评估医学知识的各种评估方法之间几乎没有相关性,并且用于评估沟通技能的各种评估方法之间也几乎没有相关性。结果项目仍然是一项“进行中的工作”,需要进行更大的研究来评估居民能力不同评估方法的价值。 DOC不太可能成为有用的评估工具。

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