PubMed · 6901145
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
J Iveson-Iveson. 1980-07-10. Students' forum.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/6901145/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
BACKGROUND: Medical student performance evaluations have historically contained a significant subjective component. Multiple tools are used to assess fund of knowledge including subjective evaluation by faculty and residents as well as objective evaluations through standardized written and oral exams. We hypothesized that subjective evaluation of medical student knowledge would correlate with objective evaluation through written and oral exams. METHODS: Records of consecutive medical students assigned to the surgery clerkship from January 1999 and March 2001 were reviewed. The core surgical rotation consisted of two 4-week blocks on a private, county, or VA hospital service. Surgical knowledge was assessed subjectively by both faculty (FES) and senior residents (RES) using a 10-point scale with verbal anchors. Objective measures of student surgical knowledge included the National Board shelf exam (WE) and a semistructured oral exam (OE). Data are reported as mean +/- SEM. Spearman rank correlation coefficient (r) was used to assess relationships between groups (r > or = 0.5 --> positive correlation). RESULTS: A total of 354 students were evaluated. The mean FES was 7.8 +/- 0.05 (median = 7.75, range 4.75 to 9.75). The mean RES was 7.7 +/- 0.06 (median = 8.0, range 3.5 to 10.0). There was poor correlation between the subjective perception and objective measures of surgical knowledge (Table 1). Comparison of the FES and RES also showed poor correlation (r = 0.38). CONCLUSIONS: Subjective evaluation of surgical knowledge by faculty and residents correlates poorly with performance measured objectively. These results question whether subjective evaluation of surgical knowledge should be included as part of the evaluation process.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: The authors performed this study to examine the relationship, if any, of a large number of measures of medical school performance with radiology residency performance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Applications of 77 radiology residents enrolled from 1991 to 2000 were reviewed. Medical school grades, dean's letter summary statements, letters of recommendation, selection to Alpha Omega Alpha (AOA), and National Board of Medical Examiners (NBME) and U.S. Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1 scores were recorded. Student t tests, analysis of variance, and correlation coefficients were used to examine the relationship between these measures of medical school performance and subsequent performance during radiology residency as determined by rotation evaluations, retrospective faculty recall scores, and American College of Radiology (ACR) and American Board of Radiology (ABR) examination scores. Resident performance was also correlated with prestige of the medical school attended. RESULTS: Preclinical grades of Honors or A; clinical grades of Honors or A in medicine, surgery, and pediatrics; and high NBME/USMLE scores strongly predicted success on the ABR written clinical examination but did not predict rotation performance. Most other measures of medical school performance, including outstanding Dean's letters and letters of recommendation, AOA selection during the senior year, and high medical school prestige did not predict high examination scores or superior rotation performance during residency. CONCLUSION: Success on the ABR examination can be predicted by medical school success in preclinical courses, some clinical courses, and USMLE examination scores. Dean's letters, letters of recommendation, AOA selection during the senior year, and medical school prestige do not appear to predict future resident performance as reliably.