School for Medicine and Health, the Wolfson Research Institute, Durham University Queen's Campus, UK.
BMC Med Educ. 2011 Jun 29;11:43. doi: 10.1186/1472-6920-11-43.
Professionalism is a difficult construct to define in medical students but aspects of this concept may be important in predicting the risk of postgraduate misconduct. For this reason attempts are being made to evaluate medical students' professionalism. This study investigated the psychometric properties of Selected Response Questions (SRQs) relating to the theme of professional conduct and ethics comparing them with two sets of control items: those testing pure knowledge of anatomy, and; items evaluating the ability to integrate and apply knowledge ("skills"). The performance of students on the SRQs was also compared with two external measures estimating aspects of professionalism in students; peer ratings of professionalism and their Conscientiousness Index, an objective measure of behaviours at medical school.
Item Response Theory (IRT) was used to analyse both question and student performance for SRQs relating to knowledge of professionalism, pure anatomy and skills. The relative difficulties, discrimination and 'guessabilities' of each theme of question were compared with each other using Analysis of Variance (ANOVA). Student performance on each topic was compared with the measures of conscientiousness and professionalism using parametric and non-parametric tests as appropriate. A post-hoc analysis of power for the IRT modelling was conducted using a Monte Carlo simulation.
Professionalism items were less difficult compared to the anatomy and skills SRQs, poorer at discriminating between candidates and more erratically answered when compared to anatomy questions. Moreover professionalism item performance was uncorrelated with the standardised Conscientiousness Index scores (rho = 0.009, p = 0.90). In contrast there were modest but significant correlations between standardised Conscientiousness Index scores and performance at anatomy items (rho = 0.20, p = 0.006) though not skills (rho = .11, p = .1). Likewise, students with high peer ratings for professionalism had superior performance on anatomy SRQs but not professionalism themed questions. A trend of borderline significance (p = .07) was observed for performance on skills SRQs and professionalism nomination status.
SRQs related to professionalism are likely to have relatively poor psychometric properties and lack associations with other constructs associated with undergraduate professional behaviour. The findings suggest that such questions should not be included in undergraduate examinations and may raise issues with the introduction of Situational Judgement Tests into Foundation Years selection.
在医学生中,专业性是一个难以定义的概念,但该概念的某些方面可能对预测研究生不当行为的风险很重要。出于这个原因,人们正在尝试评估医学生的专业性。本研究调查了与专业行为和道德主题相关的多选题(SRQs)的心理计量学特性,并将其与两套对照项目进行了比较:一套是测试解剖学纯知识的项目;另一套是评估整合和应用知识的“技能”的项目。还比较了学生对 SRQs 的表现与两个外部衡量标准,即评估学生专业性的同侪评价和他们的责任心指数,这是对医学院学生行为的客观衡量标准。
使用项目反应理论(IRT)分析了与专业知识、纯解剖学和技能相关的 SRQs 的问题和学生表现。使用方差分析(ANOVA)比较了每个主题的问题的相对难度、区分度和“猜测度”。使用适当的参数和非参数检验将每个主题的学生表现与责任心和专业性的衡量标准进行了比较。使用蒙特卡罗模拟对 IRT 建模的后验分析进行了功率分析。
与解剖学和技能 SRQs 相比,专业性项目的难度较低,区分度较差,与解剖学问题相比,回答的准确率较低。此外,专业性项目的表现与标准化责任心指数得分无关(rho = 0.009,p = 0.90)。相反,标准化责任心指数得分与解剖学项目的表现呈中度但显著相关(rho = 0.20,p = 0.006),而与技能项目无关(rho = 0.11,p = 0.1)。同样,同侪评价高的专业学生在解剖学 SRQs 上表现更好,但在专业性问题上则不然。技能 SRQs 和专业提名状态的表现呈边缘显著(p = 0.07)。
与专业性相关的 SRQs 可能具有相对较差的心理计量学特性,并且与与本科生专业行为相关的其他结构缺乏关联。研究结果表明,此类问题不应该包含在本科考试中,并且可能会引发基础年选拔中情景判断测试的引入问题。