• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

学员使用自我 TAB 进行自我评价,作为团队行为多源反馈工具评估的一部分。

Self-assessment by trainees using self-TAB as part of the team assessment of behaviour multisource feedback tool.

机构信息

West Midlands Deanery, Birmingham, UK.

出版信息

Med Teach. 2012;34(2):165-7. doi: 10.3109/0142159X.2012.644840.

DOI:10.3109/0142159X.2012.644840
PMID:22288997
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Team assessment of behaviour (TAB) is the MSF assessment tool for doctors in training in the UK Foundation Curriculum. To encourage self-assessment by Foundation doctors of their own performance, they were asked to complete a Self-TAB.

AIM

To compare doctors' self-scores with raters' scores on TAB.

METHODS

Self-TAB scores for 834 Foundation doctors were compared with rater scores in terms of descriptive statistics, concerns, correlations and a multivariate linear regression model using SPSS.

RESULTS

Foundation doctors self-scored far fewer concerns than did raters (12 doctors as having some concern, compared with 73 doctors with some concern and 23 doctors with major concern rated by others). The correlations between Self-TAB and TAB was positive, but not high, although significant. A total of 42% of Foundation doctors correctly identified concerns confirmed by other raters.

CONCLUSION

Foundation doctors have a limited ability to self assess. Nevertheless, this needs to be developed through constructive feedback and appraisal.

摘要

背景

团队行为评估(TAB)是无国界医生组织在英国基础课程中为培训医生设计的评估工具。为了鼓励基础医生对自己的表现进行自我评估,他们被要求完成自我 TAB。

目的

比较医生自我评分与 TAB 评分者的评分。

方法

使用 SPSS 对 834 名基础医生的自我 TAB 评分与评分者评分进行描述性统计、关注事项、相关性和多元线性回归模型比较。

结果

基础医生自我评估的关注事项明显少于评分者(12 名医生存在一些关注,而 73 名医生和 23 名医生存在其他评分者评估的主要关注)。自我 TAB 和 TAB 之间的相关性是正相关的,但不是很高,尽管有统计学意义。共有 42%的基础医生正确识别出了其他评分者确认的关注事项。

结论

基础医生自我评估的能力有限。尽管如此,这需要通过建设性的反馈和评估来发展。

相似文献

1
Self-assessment by trainees using self-TAB as part of the team assessment of behaviour multisource feedback tool.学员使用自我 TAB 进行自我评价,作为团队行为多源反馈工具评估的一部分。
Med Teach. 2012;34(2):165-7. doi: 10.3109/0142159X.2012.644840.
2
Assuring validity of multisource feedback in a national programme.确保国家项目中多源反馈的有效性。
Arch Dis Child. 2010 May;95(5):330-5. doi: 10.1136/adc.2008.146209.
3
Republished paper: Assuring validity of multisource feedback in a national programme.再发表的论文:在国家项目中确保多源反馈的有效性。
Postgrad Med J. 2010 Sep;86(1019):526-31. doi: 10.1136/pgmj.2008.146209rep.
4
An analysis of multisource feedback within the foundation programme.基础培训项目中的多源反馈分析
Clin Teach. 2012 Oct;9(5):290-4. doi: 10.1111/j.1743-498X.2012.00537.x.
5
Self-other agreement in multisource feedback: the influence of doctor and rater group characteristics.多源反馈中的自我与他人评价一致性:医生和评价者群体特征的影响
J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2013 Winter;33(1):14-23. doi: 10.1002/chp.21162.
6
Effect of rating scales on scores given to junior doctors in multi-source feedback.评分量表对多源反馈中初级医生评分的影响。
Postgrad Med J. 2012 Jan;88(1035):10-4. doi: 10.1136/postgradmedj-2011-130010. Epub 2011 Nov 3.
7
360 degree assessment (multisource feedback) of UK trainee doctors: field testing of team assessment of behaviours (TAB).英国实习医生的360度评估(多源反馈):行为团队评估(TAB)的现场测试
Med Teach. 2007 Mar;29(2-3):171-6. doi: 10.1080/01421590701302951.
8
How ratings vary by staff group in multi-source feedback assessment of junior doctors.多源反馈评估中不同员工群体对初级医生的评分差异。
Med Educ. 2009 Jun;43(6):516-20. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2009.03333.x.
9
mini-PAT (Peer Assessment Tool): a valid component of a national assessment programme in the UK?迷你同伴评估工具(mini-PAT):英国国家评估计划的一个有效组成部分?
Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2008 May;13(2):181-92. doi: 10.1007/s10459-006-9033-3. Epub 2006 Oct 12.
10
Team assessment of behaviour: a high stakes assessment with potential for poor implementation and impaired validity.团队行为评估:一项高风险评估,存在实施不佳和效度受损的可能性。
Clin Med (Lond). 2015 Feb;15(1):7-9. doi: 10.7861/clinmedicine.14-5-7.

引用本文的文献

1
Workplace based assessment: A review of available tools and their relevance.基于工作场所的评估:可用工具及其相关性综述。
Ind Psychiatry J. 2020 Jul-Dec;29(2):200-204. doi: 10.4103/ipj.ipj_225_20. Epub 2021 Mar 15.
2
Workplace-based Assessment; Applications and Educational Impact.基于工作场所的评估;应用与教育影响。
Malays J Med Sci. 2015 Nov;22(6):5-10.