Oldfield Zaita, Beasley Spencer W, Smith Julian, Anthony Adrian, Watt Anthony
Education Development and Research Department, Royal Australasian College of Surgeons, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
ANZ J Surg. 2013 Jun;83(6):412-6. doi: 10.1111/ans.12176. Epub 2013 May 6.
Determining admission criteria to select candidates most likely to succeed in surgical training in Australia and New Zealand has been an imprecise art with little empirical evidence informing decisions. Selection to the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons' Surgical Education and Training programme is based entirely on applicants' performance in structured curriculum vitae (CV), referees' reports and interviews. This retrospective review compared General Surgery (GS) trainees' performance in selection with subsequent performance in assessments during training.
Data from three cohorts of GS trainees were sourced. Scores for four selection items were compared with scores from six training assessments. Interrelationships within each of the sets of selection and assessment variables were determined.
A single significant relationship was found between scores on the three selection tools. High scores in the CV did not correlate with higher scores in any subsequent assessments. The structured referee report score, multi-station interview score and total selection score all correlated with performance in subsequent work-based assessments and examinations. Direct observation of procedural skills (DOPS) scores appear to reflect increasing acquisition of operative skills. Performance in mini clinical examinations (Mini-CEX) was variable, perhaps reflecting limitations of this assessment. Candidates who perform well in one examination tend to perform well in all three examinations.
No selection tool demonstrated strong relationships with scores in all subsequent assessments; however referee reports, multi-station interviews and total selection scores are indicators for performance in particular assessments. This may engender confidence that candidates admitted into the GS training programme are likely to progress successfully through the programme.
在澳大利亚和新西兰，确定录取标准以挑选最有可能在外科培训中取得成功的候选人一直是一门不精确的艺术，几乎没有实证证据为决策提供依据。澳大利亚皇家外科学院外科教育与培训项目的选拔完全基于申请人在结构化简历（CV）、推荐信和面试中的表现。这项回顾性研究比较了普通外科（GS）学员在选拔中的表现与培训期间后续评估中的表现。
收集了三组GS学员的数据。将四个选拔项目的分数与六项培训评估的分数进行比较。确定了每组选拔和评估变量之间的相互关系。
在三种选拔工具的分数之间发现了一种显著关系。简历中的高分与任何后续评估中的高分均无相关性。结构化推荐信分数、多站式面试分数和总选拔分数均与后续基于工作的评估和考试中的表现相关。操作技能直接观察（DOPS）分数似乎反映了手术技能的不断提高。小型临床考试（Mini-CEX）中的表现参差不齐，这可能反映了该评估的局限性。在一项考试中表现出色的候选人往往在所有三项考试中都表现出色。
没有一种选拔工具与所有后续评估的分数都有很强的相关性；然而，推荐信、多站式面试和总选拔分数是特定评估中表现的指标。这可能会让人相信，被GS培训项目录取的候选人很可能会在该项目中顺利取得进展。
