Department of Emergency Medicine, University of California, San Diego, UC San Diego Medical Center, San Diego, CA, USA.
Acad Emerg Med. 2010 Oct;17 Suppl 2:S38-41. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2010.00882.x.
The standard letter of recommendation (SLOR) is used by most emergency medicine (EM) faculty to submit evaluations for medical students applying for EM residency programs. In the global assessment score (GAS) section, there is a crucial summative question that asks letter writers to estimate the applicant's rank order list (ROL) position in their own program. The primary aim of the study was to determine if these estimated global assessment tiers agreed with the actual ROL, using the criteria recommended by the Council of Emergency Medicine Residency Directors (CORD).
Data from SLORs written by EM faculty from five California institutions were retrospectively collected from the 2008-2009 residency application year. Descriptive and comparative statistical analyses were performed using the documented GAS tiers and actual ROL positions.
A total of 105 SLORs were reviewed from the five participating institutions. Three SLORs were excluded and 102 were analyzed. Only 27 (26%) SLORs documented a GAS tier that accurately predicted the applicant's actual ROL position. The GAS tier overestimated the applicant's position on the ROL in 67 (66%) SLORs, whereas it underestimated the position in eight (8%) SLORs. Accuracy was poor regardless of the number of letter writers on the SLOR (p = 0.890), the writer's administrative title (p = 0.326), whether the student was a home or visiting student (p = 0.801), or if the student had prior EM rotation experience (p = 0.793).
Standard letter of recommendation writers are inaccurate in estimating the ROL position of the applicant using the GAS tier criteria. The GAS tiers were accurate only 26% of the time. Because of the valuable role that the SLOR plays in determining an applicant's competitiveness in the National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) in EM, future discussion should focus on improving the consistency and accuracy of the GAS section. Furthermore, there needs to be a national dialogue to reassess the utility of the criterion-based GAS within the SLOR.
大多数急诊医学(EM)教师都使用标准推荐信(SLOR)为申请 EM 住院医师项目的医学生提交评估。在全球评估成绩(GAS)部分,有一个关键的总结性问题,要求信件撰写者估计申请人在自己项目中的排名顺序(ROL)位置。该研究的主要目的是确定这些估计的全球评估级别是否与实际 ROL 一致,使用急诊医学住院医师主任委员会(CORD)推荐的标准。
从 2008-2009 年住院医师申请年度从加利福尼亚州的五所机构回顾性收集 SLOR 中 EM 教师撰写的数据。使用记录的 GAS 级别和实际 ROL 位置进行描述性和比较统计分析。
共审查了来自五个参与机构的 105 份 SLOR。排除了三份 SLOR,分析了 102 份。只有 27 份(26%)SLOR 记录了准确预测申请人实际 ROL 位置的 GAS 级别。在 67 份(66%)SLOR 中,GAS 级别高估了申请人在 ROL 上的位置,而在 8 份(8%)SLOR 中则低估了位置。无论 SLOR 上的信件撰写者数量(p=0.890)、撰写者的行政职称(p=0.326)、学生是本地学生还是访问学生(p=0.801)或学生是否有急诊旋转经验(p=0.793)如何,准确性都很差。
标准推荐信撰写者在使用 GAS 级别标准估计申请人的 ROL 位置时不准确。GAS 级别只有 26%的时间是准确的。由于 SLOR 在确定申请人在急诊医学中的竞争力方面发挥着重要作用国家住院医师匹配计划(NRMP),未来的讨论应侧重于提高 GAS 部分的一致性和准确性。此外,需要进行全国性对话,重新评估 SLOR 中基于标准的 GAS 的实用性。