美国国家医学考试委员会综合临床科学考试与一组五门临床科学科目考试的可比性。

Comparability of the national board of medical examiners comprehensive clinical science examination and a set of five clinical science subject examinations.

作者信息

Peterson Linda N, Rusticus Shayna A, Ross Linette P

机构信息

L.N. Peterson is adjunct professor, Department of Cellular Physiological Sciences, and senior evaluation advisor, Evaluation Studies Unit, Medical Education, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. S.A. Rusticus is statistical analyst, Evaluation Studies Unit, Medical Education, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. L.P. Ross is senior psychometrician, Scoring Services Unit of Professional Services, National Board of Medical Examiners, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

出版信息

Acad Med. 2015 May;90(5):684-90. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000643.

DOI:10.1097/ACM.0000000000000643

PMID:25629950

Abstract

PURPOSE

Accreditation standards require medical schools to use comparable assessment methods to ensure students in rotation-based clerkships and longitudinal integrated clerkships (LICs) achieve the same learning objectives. The National Board of Medical Examiners (NBME) Clinical Science Subject Examinations (subject exams) are commonly used, but an integrated examination like the NBME Comprehensive Clinical Science Examination (CCSE) may be better suited for LICs. This study examined the comparability of the CCSE and five commonly required subject exams.

METHOD

In 2009-2010, third-year medical students in rotation-based clerkships at the University of British Columbia Faculty of Medicine completed subject exams in medicine, obstetrics-gynecology, pediatrics, psychiatry, and surgery for summative purposes following each rotation and a year-end CCSE for formative purposes. Data for 205 students were analyzed to determine the relationship between scores on the CCSE (and its five discipline subscales) and the five subject exams and the impact of clerkship rotation order.

RESULTS

The correlation between the CCSE score and the average score on the five subject exams was high (0.80-0.93). Four subject exam scores were significant predictors of the CCSE score, and scores on the subject exams explained 65%-87% of CCSE score variance. Scores on each subject exam-but not rotation order-were statistically significant in predicting corresponding CCSE discipline subscale scores.

CONCLUSIONS

The results provide evidence that these five subject exams and the CCSE measure similar constructs. This suggests that assessment of clerkship-year students' knowledge using the CCSE is comparable to assessment using this set of subject exams.

摘要

目的

认证标准要求医学院校使用可比的评估方法，以确保参加轮转式临床实习和纵向综合临床实习（LIC）的学生实现相同的学习目标。美国国家医学考试委员会（NBME）临床科学科目考试（科目考试）被广泛使用，但像NBME综合临床科学考试（CCSE）这样的综合考试可能更适合LIC。本研究检验了CCSE与五项常用的科目考试的可比性。

方法

2009 - 2010年，英属哥伦比亚大学医学院参加轮转式临床实习的三年级医学生在每次轮转结束后参加医学、妇产科、儿科、精神病学和外科的科目考试以进行总结性评估，并在年终参加CCSE以进行形成性评估。分析了205名学生的数据，以确定CCSE（及其五个学科子量表）分数与五项科目考试分数之间的关系以及临床实习轮转顺序的影响。