Mixed Messages or Miscommunication? Investigating the Relationship Between Assessors' Workplace-Based Assessment Scores and Written Comments

Croix R, van Melle E. Competence By Design: a transformational national model of time-variable competency-based postgraduate medical education

Postgraduate medical education is an essential societal enterprise that prepares highly skilled physicians for the health workforce. In recent years, PGME systems have been criticized worldwide for problems with variable graduate abilities, concerns about patient safety, and issues with teaching and assessment methods. In response, competency based medical education approaches, with an emphasis on graduate outcomes, have been proposed as the direction for 21st century health profession education. However, there are few published models of large-scale implementation of these approaches. We describe the rationale and design for a national, time-variable competency-based multi-specialty system for postgraduate medical education called Competence by Design. Fourteen innovations were bundled to create this new system, using the Van Melle Core Components of competency based medical education as the basis for the transformation. The successful execution of this transformational training system shows competency based medical education can be implemented at scale. The lessons learned in the early implementation of Competence by Design can inform competency based medical education innovation efforts across professions worldwide.

An Analysis of Written and Numeric Scores in End-of-Rotation Forms from Three Residency Programs

Introduction

End-of-Rotation Forms (EORFs) assess resident progress in graduate medical education and are a major component of Clinical Competency Committee (CCC) discussion. Single-institution studies suggest EORFs can detect deficiencies, but both grades and comments skew positive. In this study, we sought to determine whether the EORFs from three programs, including multiple specialties and institutions, produced useful information for residents, program directors, and CCCs.

Methods

Evaluations from three programs were included (Program 1, Institution A, Internal Medicine: n = 38; Program 2, Institution A, Anesthesia: n = 9; Program 3, Institution B, Anesthesia: n = 11). Two independent researchers coded each written comment for relevance (specificity and actionability) and orientation (praise or critical) using a standardized rubric. Numeric scores were analyzed using descriptive statistics.

Results

4869 evaluations were collected from the programs. Of the 77,434 discrete numeric scores, 691 (0.89%) were considered "below expected level." 71.2% (2683/3767) of the total written comments were scored as irrelevant, while 3217 (85.4%) of total comments were scored positive and 550 (14.6%) were critical. When combined, 63.2% (n = 2379) of comments were scored positive and irrelevant while 6.5% (n = 246) were scored critical and relevant.

Discussion

<1% of comments indicated below average performance; >70% of comments scored irrelevant. Critical, relevant comments were least frequently observed, consistent across all 3 programs. The low rate of constructive feedback and the high rate of irrelevant comments are inadequate for a CCC to make informed decisions. The consistency of these findings across programs, specialties, and institutions suggests both local and systemic changes should be considered.

Predictors of faculty narrative evaluation quality in medical school clerkships

INTRODUCTION

Narrative approaches to assessment provide meaningful and valid representations of trainee performance. Yet, narratives are frequently perceived as vague, nonspecific and low quality. To date, there is little research examining factors associated with narrative evaluation quality, particularly in undergraduate medical education. The purpose of this study was to examine associations of faculty- and student-level characteristics with the quality of faculty member's narrative evaluations of clerkship students.

METHODS

The authors reviewed faculty narrative evaluations of 50 students' clinical performance in their inpatient medicine and neurology clerkships, resulting in 165 and 87 unique evaluations in the respective clerkships. The authors evaluated narrative quality using the Narrative Evaluation Quality Instrument (NEQI). The authors used linear mixed effects modelling to predict total NEQI score. Explanatory covariates included the following: time to evaluation completion, number of weeks spent with student, faculty total weeks on service per year, total faculty years in clinical education, student gender, faculty gender, and an interaction term between student and faculty gender.

RESULTS

Significantly higher narrative evaluation quality was associated with a shorter time to evaluation completion, with NEQI scores decreasing by approximately 0.3 points every 10 days following students' rotations (p = .004). Additionally, women faculty had statistically higher quality narrative evaluations with NEQI scores 1.92 points greater than men faculty (p = .012). All other covariates were not significant.

CONCLUSIONS

The quality of faculty members' narrative evaluations of medical students was associated with time to evaluation completion and faculty gender but not faculty experience in clinical education, faculty weeks on service, or the amount of time spent with students. Findings advance understanding on ways to improve the quality of narrative evaluations which are imperative given assessment models that will increase the volume and reliance on narratives.

Validity evidence for the Quality of Assessment for Learning score: a quality metric for supervisor comments in Competency Based Medical Education

BACKGROUND

Competency based medical education (CBME) relies on supervisor narrative comments contained within entrustable professional activities (EPA) for programmatic assessment, but the quality of these supervisor comments is unassessed. There is validity evidence supporting the QuAL (Quality of Assessment for Learning) score for rating the usefulness of short narrative comments in direct observation.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to establish validity evidence for the QuAL score to rate the quality of supervisor narrative comments contained within an EPA by surveying the key end-users of EPA narrative comments: residents, academic advisors, and competence committee members.

METHODS

In 2020, the authors randomly selected 52 de-identified narrative comments from two emergency medicine EPA databases using purposeful sampling. Six collaborators (two residents, two academic advisors, and two competence committee members) were recruited from each of four EM Residency Programs (Saskatchewan, McMaster, Ottawa, and Calgary) to rate these comments with a utility score and the QuAL score. Correlation between utility and QuAL score were calculated using Pearson's correlation coefficient. Sources of variance and reliability were calculated using a generalizability study.

RESULTS

All collaborators (n = 24) completed the full study. The QuAL score had a high positive correlation with the utility score amongst the residents (r = 0.80) and academic advisors (r = 0.75) and a moderately high correlation amongst competence committee members (r = 0.68). The generalizability study found that the major source of variance was the comment indicating the tool performs well across raters.

CONCLUSION

The QuAL score may serve as an outcome measure for program evaluation of supervisors, and as a resource for faculty development.

Concordance of Narrative Comments with Supervision Ratings Provided During Entrustable Professional Activity Assessments

BACKGROUND

Use of EPA-based entrustment-supervision ratings to determine a learner's readiness to assume patient care responsibilities is expanding.

OBJECTIVE

In this study, we investigate the correlation between narrative comments and supervision ratings assigned during ad hoc assessments of medical students' performance of EPA tasks.

DESIGN

Data from assessments completed for students enrolled in the clerkship phase over 2 academic years were used to extract a stratified random sample of 100 narrative comments for review by an expert panel.

PARTICIPANTS

A review panel, comprised of faculty with specific expertise related to their roles within the EPA program, provided a "gold standard" supervision rating using the comments provided by the original assessor.

MAIN MEASURES

Interrater reliability (IRR) between members of review panel and correlation coefficients (CC) between expert ratings and supervision ratings from original assessors.

KEY RESULTS

IRR among members of the expert panel ranged from .536 for comments associated with focused history taking to .833 for complete physical exam. CC (Kendall's correlation coefficient W) between panel members' assignment of supervision ratings and the ratings provided by the original assessors for history taking, physical examination, and oral presentation comments were .668, .697, and .735 respectively. The supervision ratings of the expert panel had the highest degree of correlation with ratings provided during assessments done by master assessors, faculty trained to assess students across clinical contexts. Correlation between supervision ratings provided with the narrative comments at the time of observation and supervision ratings assigned by the expert panel differed by clinical discipline, perhaps reflecting the value placed on, and perhaps the comfort level with, assessment of the task in a given specialty.

CONCLUSIONS

To realize the full educational and catalytic effect of EPA assessments, assessors must apply established performance expectations and provide high-quality narrative comments aligned with the criteria.

Harnessing Natural Language Processing to Support Decisions Around Workplace-Based Assessment: Machine Learning Study of Competency-Based Medical Education

BACKGROUND

Residents receive a numeric performance rating (eg, 1-7 scoring scale) along with a narrative (ie, qualitative) feedback based on their performance in each workplace-based assessment (WBA). Aggregated qualitative data from WBA can be overwhelming to process and fairly adjudicate as part of a global decision about learner competence. Current approaches with qualitative data require a human rater to maintain attention and appropriately weigh various data inputs within the constraints of working memory before rendering a global judgment of performance.

OBJECTIVE

This study explores natural language processing (NLP) and machine learning (ML) applications for identifying trainees at risk using a large WBA narrative comment data set associated with numerical ratings.

METHODS

NLP was performed retrospectively on a complete data set of narrative comments (ie, text-based feedback to residents based on their performance on a task) derived from WBAs completed by faculty members from multiple hospitals associated with a single, large, residency program at McMaster University, Canada. Narrative comments were vectorized to quantitative ratings using the bag-of-n-grams technique with 3 input types: unigram, bigrams, and trigrams. Supervised ML models using linear regression were trained with the quantitative ratings, performed binary classification, and output a prediction of whether a resident fell into the category of at risk or not at risk. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy metrics are reported.

RESULTS

The database comprised 7199 unique direct observation assessments, containing both narrative comments and a rating between 3 and 7 in imbalanced distribution (scores 3-5: 726 ratings; and scores 6-7: 4871 ratings). A total of 141 unique raters from 5 different hospitals and 45 unique residents participated over the course of 5 academic years. When comparing the 3 different input types for diagnosing if a trainee would be rated low (ie, 1-5) or high (ie, 6 or 7), our accuracy for trigrams was 87%, bigrams 86%, and unigrams 82%. We also found that all 3 input types had better prediction accuracy when using a bimodal cut (eg, lower or higher) compared with predicting performance along the full 7-point rating scale (50%-52%).

CONCLUSIONS

The ML models can accurately identify underperforming residents via narrative comments provided for WBAs. The words generated in WBAs can be a worthy data set to augment human decisions for educators tasked with processing large volumes of narrative assessments.

The Impact of Electronic Data to Capture Qualitative Comments in a Competency-Based Assessment System

Introduction

Digitalizing workplace-based assessments (WBA) holds the potential for facilitating feedback and performance review, wherein we can easily record, store, and analyze data in real time. When digitizing assessment systems, however, it is unclear what is gained and lost in the message as a result of the change in medium. This study evaluates the quality of comments generated in paper vs. electronic media and the influence of an assessor’s seniority.

Methods

Using a realist evaluation framework, a retrospective database review was conducted with paper-based and electronic medium comments. A sample of assessments was examined to determine any influence of the medium on the word count and the Quality of Assessment for Learning (QuAL) score. A correlation analysis evaluated the relationship between word count and QuAL score. Separate univariate analyses of variance (ANOVAs) were used to examine the influence of the assessor's seniority and medium on word count, QuAL score, and WBA scores.

Results

The analysis included a total of 1,825 records. The average word count for the electronic comments (M=16) was significantly higher than the paper version (M=12; p=0.01). Longer comments positively correlated with QuAL score (r=0.2). Paper-based comments received lower QuAL scores (0.41) compared to electronic (0.51; p<0.01). Years in practice was negatively correlated with QuAL score (r=-0.08; p<0.001) as was word count (r=-0.2; p<0.001).

Conclusion

Digitization of WBAs increased the length of comments and did not appear to jeopardize the quality of WBAs; these results indicate higher-quality assessment data. True digital transformation may be possible by harnessing trainee data repositories and repurposing them to analyze for faculty-relevant metrics.

Warnings in early narrative assessment that might predict performance in residency: signal from an internal medicine residency program

INTRODUCTION

Narrative assessment data are valuable in understanding struggles in resident performance. However, it remains unknown which themes in narrative data that occur early in training may indicate a higher likelihood of struggles later in training, allowing programs to intervene sooner.

METHODS

Using learning analytics, we identified 26 internal medicine residents in three cohorts that were below expected entrustment during training. We compiled all narrative data in the first 6 months of training for these residents as well as 13 typically performing residents for comparison. Narrative data were blinded for all 39 residents during initial phases of an inductive thematic analysis for initial coding.

RESULTS

Many similarities were identified between the two cohorts. Codes that differed between typical and lower entrusted residents were grouped into two types of themes: three explicit/manifest and three implicit/latent with six total themes. The explicit/manifest themes focused on specific aspects of resident performance with assessors describing 1) Gaps in attention to detail, 2) Communication deficits with patients, and 3) Difficulty recognizing the "big picture" in patient care. Three implicit/latent themes, focused on how narrative data were written, were also identified: 1) Feedback described as a deficiency rather than an opportunity to improve, 2) Normative comparisons to identify a resident as being behind their peers, and 3) Warning of possible risk to patient care.

DISCUSSION

Clinical competency committees (CCCs) usually rely on accumulated data and trends. Using the themes in this paper while reviewing narrative comments may help CCCs with earlier recognition and better allocation of resources to support residents' development.

Comparing the Quality of Narrative Comments by Rotation Setting

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effect of rotation setting on trainee-directed narrative comments within a Canadian General Surgery Residency Program. The primary outcome was to use the McMaster Narrative Comment Rating Scale (MNCRS) to evaluate the quality of narrative comments across five domains: valence of language, degree of correction versus reinforcement, specificity, actionability and overall usefulness. As distributed medical education in the postgraduate training context becomes more prevalent, delineating differences in feedback between various sites will be imperative, as it may affect how narrative comments are interpreted by clinical competency committee (CCC) members.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A retrospective analysis of 2,469 assessments obtained between July 1, 2014 and May 5, 2019 from the General Surgery Residency Program at the University of British Columbia (UBC) was conducted. Narrative comments were rated using the McMaster Narrative Comment Rating Scale (MNCRS), a validated instrument for evaluating the quality of narrative comments. A repeated measures Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was conducted to explore the impact of rotation setting, academic, urban tertiary, distributed urban, and distributed rural on the quality of narrative feedback.

RESULTS

Overall, the quality of the narrative comments varied substantially between and within rotation settings. Academic sites tended to provide more actionable comments (p = 0.01) and more corrective versus reinforcing comments, compared with other sites (p's < 0.01). Comments produced by the urban tertiary rotation setting were consistently lower in quality across all scale categories compared with other settings (p's < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

The type of rotation setting has a significant effect on the quality of faculty feedback for trainees. Faculty development on the provision of feedback is necessary, regardless of rotation setting, and should appropriately combine rotation-specific needs and overarching program goals to ensure trainees and clinical competence committees receive high quality narrative.

Comparing Entrustment and Competence: An Exploratory Look at Performance-Relevant Information in the Final Year of a Veterinary Program

Workplace-based assessments and entrustment scales have two primary goals: providing formative information to assist students with future learning; and, determining if and when learners are ready for safe, independent practice. To date, there has not been an evaluation of the relationship between these performance-relevant information pieces in veterinary medicine. This study collected quantitative and qualitative data from a single cohort of final-year students (n = 27) across in-training evaluation reports (ITERs) and entrustment scales in a distributed veterinary hospital environment. Here we compare progression in scoring and performance within and across student, within and across method of assessment, over time. Narrative comments were quantified using the Completed Clinical Evaluation Report Rating (CCERR) instrument to assess quality of written comments. Preliminary evidence suggests that we may be capturing different aspects of performance using these two different methods. Specifically, entrustment scale scores significantly increased over time, while ITER scores did not. Typically, comments on entrustment scale scores were more learner specific, longer, and used more of a coaching voice. Longitudinal evaluation of learner performance is important for learning and demonstration of competence; however, the method of data collection could influence how feedback is structured and how performance is ultimately judged.

A scoping review of approaches for measuring 'interdependent' collaborative performances

INTRODUCTION

Individual assessment disregards the team aspect of clinical work. Team assessment collapses the individual into the group. Neither is sufficient for medical education, where measures need to attend to the individual while also accounting for interactions with others. Valid and reliable measures of interdependence are critical within medical education given the collaborative manner in which patient care is provided. Medical education currently lacks a consistent approach to measuring the performance between individuals working together as part of larger healthcare team. This review's objective was to identify existing approaches to measuring this interdependence.

METHODS

Following Arksey & O'Malley's methodology, we conducted a scoping review in 2018 and updated it to 2020. A search strategy involving five databases located >12 000 citations. At least two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts, screened full texts (n = 161) and performed data extraction on twenty-seven included articles. Interviews were also conducted with key informants to check if any literature was missing and assess that our interpretations made sense.

RESULTS

Eighteen of the twenty-seven articles were empirical; nine conceptual with an empirical illustration. Eighteen were quantitative; nine used mixed methods. The articles spanned five disciplines and various application contexts, from online learning to sports performance. Only two of the included articles were from the field of Medical Education. The articles conceptualised interdependence of a group, using theoretical constructs such as collaboration synergy; of a network, using constructs such as degree centrality; and of a dyad, using constructs such as synchrony. Both descriptive (eg social network analysis) and inferential (eg multi-level modelling) approaches were described.

CONCLUSION

Efforts to measure interdependence are scarce and scattered across disciplines. Multiple theoretical concepts and inconsistent terminology may be limiting programmatic work. This review motivates the need for further study of measurement techniques, particularly those combining multiple approaches, to capture interdependence in medical education.

Implementing Systematic Faculty Development to Support an EPA-Based Program of Assessment: Strategies, Outcomes, and Lessons Learned

Problem: Development of a novel, competency-based program of assessment requires creation of a plan to measure the processes that enable successful implementation. The principles of implementation science outline the importance of considering key drivers that support and sustain transformative change within an educational program. The introduction of Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs) as a framework for assessment has underscored the need to create a structured plan to prepare assessors to engage in a new paradigm of assessment. Although approaches to rater training for workplace-based assessments have been described, specific strategies to prepare assessors to apply standards related to the level of supervision a student needs have not been documented. Intervention: We describe our systematic approach to prepare assessors, faculty and postgraduate trainees, to complete EPA assessments for medical students during the clerkship phase of our curriculum. This institution-wide program is designed to build assessors' skills in direct observation of learners during authentic patient encounters. Assessors apply new knowledge and practice skills in using established performance expectations to determine the level of supervision a learner needs to perform clinical tasks. Assessors also learn to provide feedback and narrative comments to coach students and promote their ongoing clinical development. Data visualizations for assessors facilitate reinforcement of the tenets learned during training. Collaborative learning and peer feedback during faculty development sessions promote the formation of a community of practice among assessors. Context: Faculty development for assessors was implemented in advance of implementation of the EPA program. Assessors in the program include residents/fellows who work closely with students, faculty with discipline-specific expertise and a group of experienced clinicians who were selected to serve as experts in competency-based EPA assessments, the Master Assessors. Training focused on creating a shared understanding about the application of criteria used to evaluate student performance. EPA assessments based on the AAMC's Core Entrustable Professional Activities for Entering Residency, were completed in nine core clerkships. EPA assessments included a supervision rating based on a modified scale for use in undergraduate medical education. Impact: Data from EPA assessments completed during the first year of the program were analyzed to evaluate the effectiveness of the faculty development activities implemented to prepare assessors to consistently apply standards for assessment. A systematic approach to training and attention to critical drivers that enabled institution-wide implementation, led to consistency in the supervision rating for students' first EPA assessment completed by any type of assessor, ratings by assessors done within a specific clinical context, and ratings assigned by a group of specific assessors across clinical settings. Lessons learned: A systematic approach to faculty development with a willingness to be flexible and reach potential participants using existing infrastructure, can facilitate assessors' engagement in a new culture of assessment. Interaction among participants during training sessions not only promotes learning but also contributes to community building. A leadership group responsible to oversee faculty development can ensure that the needs of stakeholders are addressed and that a change in assessment culture is sustained.

Seeing potential opportunities for teaching (SPOT): Evaluating a bundle of interventions to augment entrustable professional activity acquisition

INTRODUCTION

Within the Canadian competency-based medical education system, entrustable professional activities (EPAs) are used to assess residents on performed clinical duties. This study aimed to determine whether implementing a bundle of two interventions (a case-based discussion intervention and a rotation-based nudging system) could increase the number of EPA assessments that could occur for our trainees.

METHODS

The authors designed an intervention bundle with two components: 1) a case-based workshop where trainees discussed which EPAs could be assessed with multiple cases and 2) a nudging system wherein each trainee was reminded of EPAs that would be useful to them on each rotation in their first year. We conducted a retrospective program evaluation to compare the intervention cohort (2019) to two historical cohorts using similar EPAs (2017, 2018).

RESULTS

Data from 22 trainees (seven in 2017, eight in 2018, and seven in 2019) were analyzed. There was a marked increase in the total number of EPA assessments acquired in the 2019 cohort (average per resident = 285.7, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 256.1 to 312.3, range = 195-350) compared to the two other years (2018 [average = 132.4, 95% CI = 107.5 to 157.02, range = 107-167] and 2017 [70.1, 95% CI 45.3 to 91.0, range = 49-95]), yielding an effect size of Cohen's d = 4.02 for our intervention bundle.

CONCLUSIONS

Within the limitations of a small sample size, there was a strong effect of introducing two interventions (a case-based orientation and a nudging system) upon EPA assessments with PGY-1 residents. These strategies may be useful to others seeking to improve EPA assessment numbers in other specialties and clinical environments.

Direct Observation Tools in Emergency Medicine: A Systematic Review of the Literature

OBJECTIVES

Direct observation is important for assessing the competency of medical learners. Multiple tools have been described in other fields, although the degree of emergency medicine-specific literature is unclear. This review sought to summarize the current literature on direct observation tools in the emergency department (ED) setting.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, the Cochrane Central Register of Clinical Trials, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, ERIC, PsycINFO, and Google Scholar from 2012 to 2020 for publications on direct observation tools in the ED setting. Data were dual extracted into a predefined worksheet, and quality analysis was performed using the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument.

RESULTS

We identified 38 publications, comprising 2,977 learners. Fifteen different tools were described. The most commonly assessed tools included the Milestones (nine studies), Observed Structured Clinical Exercises (seven studies), the McMaster Modular Assessment Program (six studies), Queen's Simulation Assessment Test (five studies), and the mini-Clinical Evaluation Exercise (four studies). Most of the studies were performed in a single institution, and there were limited validity or reliability assessments reported.

CONCLUSIONS

The number of publications on direct observation tools for the ED setting has markedly increased. However, there remains a need for stronger internal and external validity data.

Patient feedback in the emergency department: A feasibility study of the Resident Communication Assessment Program (ReCAP)

OBJECTIVE

Resident physicians must develop competence in interpersonal and communication skills, but workplace-based assessment of these skills remains challenging. We explored the feasibility of the Resident Communication Assessment Program (ReCAP) for eliciting patient feedback about resident physician communication in the emergency department (ED).

METHODS

This study is a prospective, observational study conducted in the ED of a university-based hospital from December 2018 through April 2019. ReCAP is a program that interviews patients prior to discharge from the ED using the Communication Assessment Tool (CAT). CAT consists of 14 Likert style questions and 3 open-ended questions for patient feedback about residents' communication. Open-text, narrative responses from patients were coded using a modified version of the Completed Clinical Evaluation Report Rating tool.

RESULTS

We collected data from 42 subjects who completed the CAT, and provided 32 open-text, narrative responses about 20 resident physicians. Patient responses were overwhelmingly positive with 551/588 (94%) CAT responses scoring "Very Good," the highest category. Open-text, narrative comments analyzed using CCERR were unbalanced, favoring residents' strengths rather than areas for improvement. Patient comments offered more examples of strengths than weaknesses, and few subjects provided recommendations to improve resident performance.

CONCLUSION

ReCAP represents a feasible method for eliciting patient feedback about resident communication skills in the ED. The CAT can be used to structure brief patient interviews by trained staff but generally elicits only positive feedback. Further studies are needed to identify more discriminatory assessment tools.

The Quality of Assessment of Learning (Qual) Score: Validity Evidence for a Scoring System Aimed at Rating Short, Workplace-Based Comments on Trainee Performance

Construct: This study seeks to determine validity evidence for the Quality of Assessment for Learning score (QuAL score), which was created to evaluate short qualitative comments that are related to specific scores entered into a workplace-based assessment, common within the competency-based medical education (CBME) context. Background: In the age of CBME, qualitative comments play an important role in clarifying the quantitative scores rendered by observers at the bedside. Currently there are few practical tools that evaluate mixed data (e.g. associated score-and-comment data), other than the comprehensive Completed Clinical Evaluation Report Rating tool (CCERR) that was originally derived to rate end-of-rotation reports. Approach: A multi-center, randomized cohort-based rating exercise was conducted to evaluate the rating properties of the QuAL score as compared to the CCERR. One group rated comments using the QuAL score, and the other group rated comments using the CCERR. A generalizability study (G-Study) and a decision study (D-study) were conducted to determine the number of meta-raters for a reliable rating (phi-coefficient target of >0.80). Both scores were correlated against rater's gestalt perceptions of utility for both faculty and residents reading the scores. Results: Twenty-five meta-raters from 20 sites participated in this rating exercise. The G-study revealed that the CCERR group (n = 13) rated the comments with a very high reliability (Phi = 0.97). Meanwhile, the QuAL group (n = 12) rated the comments with a similarly high reliability (Phi = 0.97). The QuAL score required only two raters to reach an acceptable target reliability of >0.80, while the CCERR required three. The QuAL score correlated with perceptions of utility (Meta-rater usefulness, Pearson's r = 0.69, p < 0.001; Perceived usefulness for trainee, r = 0.74, p < 0.001). The CCERR performed similarly, correlating with perceived faculty (r = 0.67, <0.001) and resident utility (0.79, <0.001). Conclusions: The QuAL score is reliable rating score that correlates well with perceptions of utility. The QuAL score may be useful for rating shorter comments generated by workplace-based assessments.

Advancing Our Understanding of Narrative Comments Generated by Direct Observation Tools: Lessons From the Psychopharmacotherapy-Structured Clinical Observation

BACKGROUND

While prior research has focused on the validity of quantitative ratings generated by direct observation tools, much less is known about the written comments.

OBJECTIVE

This study examines the quality of written comments and their relationship with checklist scores generated by a direct observation tool, the Psychopharmacotherapy-Structured Clinical Observation (P-SCO).

METHODS

From 2008 to 2012, faculty in a postgraduate year 3 psychiatry outpatient clinic completed 601 P-SCOs. Twenty-five percent were randomly selected from each year; the sample included 8 faculty and 57 residents. To assess quality, comments were coded for valence (reinforcing or corrective), behavioral specificity, and content. To assess the relationship between comments and scores, the authors calculated the correlation between comment and checklist score valence and examined the degree to which comments and checklist scores addressed the same content.

RESULTS

Ninety-one percent of the comments were behaviorally specific. Sixty percent were reinforcing, and 40% were corrective. Eight themes were identified, including 2 constructs not adequately represented by the checklist. Comment and checklist score valence was moderately correlated (Spearman's rho = 0.57, P < .001). Sixty-seven percent of high and low checklist scores were associated with a comment of the same valence and content. Only 50% of overall comments were associated with a checklist score of the same valence and content.

CONCLUSIONS

A direct observation tool such as the P-SCO can generate high-quality written comments. Narrative comments both explain checklist scores and convey unique content. Thematic coding of comments can improve the content validity of a checklist.

Attending Emergency Physicians' Perceptions of a Programmatic Workplace-Based Assessment System: The McMaster Modular Assessment Program (McMAP)

Construct: The McMaster Modular Assessment Program (McMAP) is a programmatic workplace-based assessment (WBA) system that provides emergency medicine trainees with competency judgments through frequent task-specific and global daily assessments. Background: The longevity of McMAP relative to other programmatic WBA systems affords a unique view that precedes large-scale transitions to competency-based medical education (CBME), particularly in North America. Although prior work has described the perspective of residents using this system, the in-depth experiences of assessors using the system have yet to be explored. This perspective is important for understanding the validity of the competency judgments the system produces. Approach: We conducted a qualitative study that used semi-structured interviews analyzed using interpretive description (Thorne) to explore 16 attending physicians' experiences using McMAP. Data analysis was completed independently by 2 researchers, who met regularly to discuss codes and resolve any disagreements. Results: Having a structured assessment framework for a range of clinical tasks has helped encourage what attendings perceived to be more frequent and better-quality assessments, with the added advantages of being holistic, flexible, and learner-driven. However, attendings also perceived a number of challenges of McMAP and programmatic WBA more broadly. These included a reluctance to give and to document negative feedback, "gaming" of the system by both attendings and residents, and a variety of logistic and technology-related concerns. Conclusions: Based on our findings, we offer several key recommendations that can help programs maximize the benefits of programmatic WBA as they transition to CBME.

Faculty development in the age of competency-based medical education: A needs assessment of Canadian emergency medicine faculty and senior trainees

OBJECTIVES

The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada (RCPSC) emergency medicine (EM) programs transitioned to the Competence by Design training framework in July 2018. Prior to this transition, a nation-wide survey was conducted to gain a better understanding of EM faculty and senior resident attitudes towards the implementation of this new program of assessment.

METHODS

A multi-site, cross-sectional needs assessment survey was conducted. We aimed to document perceptions about competency-based medical education, attitudes towards implementation, perceived/prompted/unperceived faculty development needs. EM faculty and senior residents were nominated by program directors across RCPSC EM programs. Simple descriptive statistics were used to analyse the data.

RESULTS

Between February and April 2018, 47 participants completed the survey (58.8% response rate). Most respondents (89.4%) thought learners should receive feedback during every shift; 55.3% felt that they provided adequate feedback. Many respondents (78.7%) felt that the ED would allow for direct observation, and most (91.5%) participants were confident that they could incorporate workplace-based assessments (WBAs). Although a fair number of respondents (44.7%) felt that Competence by Design would not impact patient care, some (17.0%) were worried that it may negatively impact it. Perceived faculty development priorities included feedback delivery, completing WBAs, and resident promotion decisions.

CONCLUSIONS

RCPSC EM faculty have positive attitudes towards competency-based medical education-relevant concepts such as feedback and opportunities for direct observation via WBAs. Perceived threats to Competence by Design implementation included concerns that patient care and trainee education might be negatively impacted. Faculty development should concentrate on further developing supervisors' teaching skills, focusing on feedback using WBAs.

Key Studies in Medical Education from 2017: ANarrative Review

Education, like clinical medicine, should be based on the most current evidence in the field. Despite the overwhelming breadth of literature in medical education, pediatric educators desire and need to incorporate best practices into their educational approaches. This article provides an overview of 18 articles from the literature in 2017 that the authors consider to be key articles in the field of pediatric medical education. The 7 authors, all medical educators with combined leadership experience and expertise across the continuum of pediatric medical education, used an iterative, staged process to review more than 1682 abstracts published in 2017. This process aimed to identify a subset of articles that were most relevant to educational practice and most applicable to pediatric medical education. In the process, pairs of authors independently reviewed and scored abstracts in 13 medical education-related journals and reached consensus to identify the abstracts that best met these criteria. Selected abstracts were discussed using different pairs to select the final articles included in this review. This paper presents summaries of the 18 articles that were selected. The results revealed a cluster of studies related to feedback, coaching, and observation; trainee progression, educator development, trainee entrustment, culture, and climate; and the medical student experience. This narrative review offers a useful tool for educators interested in keeping informed about the most relevant and valuable information in the field of medical education.

Managing tensions in assessment: moving beyond either-or thinking

CONTEXT

In health professions education, assessment systems are bound to be rife with tensions as they must fulfil formative and summative assessment purposes, be efficient and effective, and meet the needs of learners and education institutes, as well as those of patients and health care organisations. The way we respond to these tensions determines the fate of assessment practices and reform. In this study, we argue that traditional 'fix-the-problem' approaches (i.e. either-or solutions) are generally inadequate and that we need alternative strategies to help us further understand, accept and actually engage with the multiple recurring tensions in assessment programmes.

METHODS

Drawing from research in organisation science and health care, we outline how the Polarity Thinking™ model and its 'both-and' approach offer ways to systematically leverage assessment tensions as opportunities to drive improvement, rather than as intractable problems. In reviewing the assessment literature, we highlight and discuss exemplars of specific assessment polarities and tensions in educational settings. Using key concepts and principles of the Polarity Thinking™ model, and two examples of common tensions in assessment design, we describe how the model can be applied in a stepwise approach to the management of key polarities in assessment.

DISCUSSION

Assessment polarities and tensions are likely to surface with the continued rise of complexity and change in education and health care organisations. With increasing pressures of accountability in times of stretched resources, assessment tensions and dilemmas will become more pronounced. We propose to add to our repertoire of strategies for managing key dilemmas in education and assessment design through the adoption of the polarity framework. Its 'both-and' approach may advance our efforts to transform assessment systems to meet complex 21st century education, health and health care needs.

Examining the Effects of Narrative Commentary on Evaluators’ Summative Assessments of Resident Performance

Anchor-based, end-of-shift ratings are commonly used to conduct performance assessments of resident physicians. These performance evaluations often include narrative assessments, such as solicited or “free-text” commentary. Although narrative commentary can help to create a more detailed and specific assessment of performance, there are limited data describing the effects of narrative commentary on the global assessment process. This single-group, observational study examined the effect of narrative comments on global performance assessments. A subgroup of the clinical competency committee, blinded to resident identity, assigned a single, consensus-based performance score (1–6) to each resident based solely on end-of-shift milestone scores. De-identified narrative comments from end-of-shift evaluations were then included and the process was repeated. We compared milestone-only scores to milestone plus narrative commentary scores using a nonparametric sign test. During the study period, 953 end-of-shift evaluations were submitted on 41 residents. Of these, 535 evaluations included free-text narrative comments. In 17 of the 41 observations, performance scores changed after the addition of narrative comments. In two cases, scores decreased with the addition of free-text commentary. In 15 cases, scores increased. The frequency of net positive change was significant ( p = .0023). The addition of narrative commentary to anchor-based ratings significantly influenced the global performance assessment of Emergency Medicine residents by a committee of educators. Descriptive commentary collected at the end of shift may inform more meaningful appraisal of a resident’s progress in a milestone-based paradigm. The authors recommend clinical training programs collect unstructured narrative impressions of residents’ performance from supervising faculty.

Considering the interdependence of clinical performance: implications for assessment and entrustment

INTRODUCTION

Our ability to assess independent trainee performance is a key element of competency-based medical education (CBME). In workplace-based clinical settings, however, the performance of a trainee can be deeply entangled with others on the team. This presents a fundamental challenge, given the need to assess and entrust trainees based on the evolution of their independent clinical performance. The purpose of this study, therefore, was to understand what faculty members and senior postgraduate trainees believe constitutes independent performance in a variety of clinical specialty contexts.

METHODS

Following constructivist grounded theory, and using both purposive and theoretical sampling, we conducted individual interviews with 11 clinical teaching faculty members and 10 senior trainees (postgraduate year 4/5) across 12 postgraduate specialties. Constant comparative inductive analysis was conducted. Return of findings was also carried out using one-to-one sessions with key informants and public presentations.

RESULTS

Although some independent performances were described, participants spoke mostly about the exceptions to and disclaimers about these, elaborating their sense of the interdependence of trainee performances. Our analysis of these interdependence patterns identified multiple configurations of coupling, with the dominant being coupling of trainee and supervisor performance. We consider how the concept of coupling could advance workplace-based assessment efforts by supporting models that account for the collective dimensions of clinical performance.

CONCLUSION

These findings call into question the assumption of independent performance, and offer an important step toward measuring coupled performance. An understanding of coupling can help both to better distinguish independent and interdependent performances, and to consider revising workplace-based assessment approaches for CBME.

Learning Analytics in Medical Education Assessment: The Past, the Present, and the Future

With the implementation of competency-based medical education (CBME) in emergency medicine, residency programs will amass substantial amounts of qualitative and quantitative data about trainees' performances. This increased volume of data will challenge traditional processes for assessing trainees and remediating training deficiencies. At the intersection of trainee performance data and statistical modeling lies the field of medical learning analytics. At a local training program level, learning analytics has the potential to assist program directors and competency committees with interpreting assessment data to inform decision making. On a broader level, learning analytics can be used to explore system questions and identify problems that may impact our educational programs. Scholars outside of health professions education have been exploring the use of learning analytics for years and their theories and applications have the potential to inform our implementation of CBME. The purpose of this review is to characterize the methodologies of learning analytics and explore their potential to guide new forms of assessment within medical education.

Nuance and Noise: Lessons Learned From Longitudinal Aggregated Assessment Data

BACKGROUND

Competency-based medical education requires frequent assessment to tailor learning experiences to the needs of trainees. In 2012, we implemented the McMaster Modular Assessment Program, which captures shift-based assessments of resident global performance.

OBJECTIVE

We described patterns (ie, trends and sources of variance) in aggregated workplace-based assessment data.

METHODS

Emergency medicine residents and faculty members from 3 Canadian university-affiliated, urban, tertiary care teaching hospitals participated in this study. During each shift, supervising physicians rated residents' performance using a behaviorally anchored scale that hinged on endorsements for progression. We used a multilevel regression model to examine the relationship between global rating scores and time, adjusting for data clustering by resident and rater.

RESULTS

We analyzed data from 23 second-year residents between July 2012 and June 2015, which yielded 1498 unique ratings (65 ± 18.5 per resident) from 82 raters. The model estimated an average score of 5.7 ± 0.6 at baseline, with an increase of 0.005 ± 0.01 for each additional assessment. There was significant variation among residents' starting score (y-intercept) and trajectory (slope).

CONCLUSIONS

Our model suggests that residents begin at different points and progress at different rates. Meta-raters such as program directors and Clinical Competency Committee members should bear in mind that progression may take time and learning trajectories will be nuanced. Individuals involved in ratings should be aware of sources of noise in the system, including the raters themselves.