Williams Reed G, Schwind Cathy J, Dunnington Gary L, Fortune John, Rogers David, Boehler Margaret
Department of Surgery, Southern Illinois University School of Medicine, Springfield, Illinois 62794-9638, USA.
Teach Learn Med. 2005 Spring;17(2):96-100. doi: 10.1207/s15328015tlm1702_1.
Prior investigations suggest that resident progress decisions by committee provide a broader perspective on performance and result in less grade inflation. There is countervailing concern that group dynamics may compromise quality of progress decisions.
To determine whether and how group dynamics compromise decision making about resident progress.
Researchers recorded and analyzed participant comments during a resident progress committee meeting. End-of-rotation (EOR) evaluations were analyzed and compared to progress committee meeting results.
EOR and progress committee comments were similar in content. The ratio of specific to general comments was higher for EOR evaluations (5:1) than for progress committee meetings (2:1). EOR evaluation comments provided more supporting evidence for assertions. Individual progress committee participants did not dominate discussion or sway decision making. Participant progress committee meeting comments were consistent with their EOR comments failing to support the presence of progress committee meeting "feeding frenzies."
Results suggest that progress committee meeting group dynamics do not seriously compromise the validity of resident progress decisions.
先前的调查表明，由委员会做出的住院医师进步决策能提供更全面的表现视角，且能减少成绩通胀。但也有人担心群体动态可能会损害进步决策的质量。
确定群体动态是否以及如何损害关于住院医师进步的决策。
研究人员记录并分析了住院医师进步委员会会议期间参与者的评论。分析了轮转结束（EOR）评估，并与进步委员会会议结果进行比较。
EOR和进步委员会的评论在内容上相似。EOR评估中具体评论与一般评论的比例（5:1）高于进步委员会会议（2:1）。EOR评估评论为断言提供了更多支持证据。进步委员会的个别参与者没有主导讨论或左右决策。进步委员会会议参与者的评论与他们的EOR评论一致，不支持进步委员会会议存在“哄抢”现象。
结果表明，进步委员会会议的群体动态不会严重损害住院医师进步决策的有效性。
