skip to main content
Idioma:
Tipo de recurso Mostra resultados com: Mostra resultados com: Índice

A german-language competency-based multisource feedback instrument for residents: development and validity evidence

Hennel, Eva K ; Subotic, Ulrike ; Berendonk, Christoph ; Stricker, Daniel ; Harendza, Sigrid ; Huwendiek, Sören

BMC medical education, 2020-10, Vol.20 (1), p.357-357, Article 357 [Periódico revisado por pares]

England: BioMed Central Ltd

Texto completo disponível

Citações Citado por
  • Título:
    A german-language competency-based multisource feedback instrument for residents: development and validity evidence
  • Autor: Hennel, Eva K ; Subotic, Ulrike ; Berendonk, Christoph ; Stricker, Daniel ; Harendza, Sigrid ; Huwendiek, Sören
  • Assuntos: 360-degree ; Analysis ; Assessment ; Certification ; Clinical Competence ; Continuous professional development ; Family physicians ; Feedback ; German language ; Humans ; Internship and Residency ; Investigations ; Language ; Medical education ; Multisource feedback ; Nurses ; Pediatrics ; Postgraduate training ; Professional development ; Questionnaires ; Reproducibility of Results ; Self evaluation ; Supervisors ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Validity ; Workplace-based assessment
  • É parte de: BMC medical education, 2020-10, Vol.20 (1), p.357-357, Article 357
  • Notas: ObjectType-Article-1
    SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
    ObjectType-Feature-2
    content type line 23
  • Descrição: In medical settings, multisource feedback (MSF) is a recognised method of formative assessment. It collects feedback on a doctor's performance from several perspectives in the form of questionnaires. Yet, no validated MSF questionnaire has been publicly available in German. Thus, we aimed to develop a German MSF questionnaire based on the CanMEDS roles and to investigate the evidence of its validity. We developed a competency-based MSF questionnaire in German, informed by the literature and expert input. Four sources of validity evidence were investigated: (i) Content was examined based on MSF literature, blueprints of competency, and expert-team discussions. (ii) The response process was supported by analysis of a think-aloud study, narrative comments, "unable to comment" ratings and evaluation data. (iii) The internal structure was assessed by exploratory factor analysis, and inter-rater reliability by generalisability analysis. Data were collected during two runs of MSF, in which 47 residents were evaluated once (first run) or several times (second and third run) on 81 occasions of MSF. (iv) To investigate consequences, we analysed the residents' learning goals and the progress as reported via MSF. Our resulting MSF questionnaire (MSF-RG) consists of 15 items and one global rating, which are each rated on a scale and accompanied by a field for narrative comments and cover a construct of a physician's competence. Additionally, there are five open questions for further suggestions. Investigation of validity evidence revealed that: (i) The expert group agreed that the content comprehensively addresses clinical competence; (ii) The response processes indicated that the questions are understood as intended and supported the acceptance and usability; (iii) For the second run, factor analysis showed a one-factor solution, a Cronbach's alpha of 0.951 and an inter-rater reliability of 0.797 with 12 raters; (iv) There are indications that residents benefitted, considering their individual learning goals and based on their ratings reported via MSF itself. To support residency training with multisource feedback, we developed a German MSF questionnaire (MSF-RG), which is supported by four sources of validity evidence. This MSF questionnaire may be useful to implement MSF in residency training in German-speaking regions.
  • Editor: England: BioMed Central Ltd
  • Idioma: Inglês
Links
Voltar para lista de resultados

  • Realização: ABCD-USP USP   Logos de Redes Sociais: Freepik

Buscando em bases de dados remotas. Favor aguardar.