Does direct observation happen early in a new competency‐based residency program?
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: A key component of competency-based medical education is workplace-based assessment, which includes observation (direct or indirect) of residents. Direct observation has been emphasized as an ideal form of assessment yet challenges have been identified that may limit its adoption. At present, it remains unclear how often direct and indirect observation are being used within the clinical setting. The objective of this study was to describe patterns of observation in an emergency medicine competency-based program 2 years postimplementation. METHODS: = 19) recorded the type of observation they received (direct or indirect) following workplace-based entrustable professional activity (EPA) assessments from December 15, 2019, to April 30, 2020. Assessment forms were reviewed and analyzed to describe patters of observation. RESULTS: Assessments were collected on all 19 eligible residents (100% participation). A total of 1,070 EPA assessments were completed during the study period, of which 798 (74.6%) had the type of observation recorded. Of these recorded observations, 546 (68.4%) were directly observed and 252 (31.6%) were indirectly observed. The length of written comments contained within assessments following direct and indirect observation did not differ significantly. There was no significant association between resident gender and observation type or resident stage of training and observation type. Certain EPA assessments showed a clear preference toward either direct or indirect observation. CONCLUSIONS: To the best of our knowledge, this study is the first to report patterns of observation in a competency-based residency program. The results suggest that direct observation can be quickly adopted as the primary means of workplace-based assessment. Indirect observation comprised a sizeable minority of observations and may be an underrecognized contributor to workplace-based assessment. The preference toward either direct or indirect observation for certain EPA assessments suggests that the entrustable professional activity itself may influence the type of observation.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».