Isala Academy, Department of Medical Education and Faculty Development, Isala Hospital, Zwolle, the Netherlands.
Center for Education Development and Research in Health Professions, University of Groningen and University Medical Centre, Groningen, the Netherlands.
BMC Med Educ. 2019 Dec 3;19(1):450. doi: 10.1186/s12909-019-1874-6.
Even in anonymous evaluations of a postgraduate medical education (PGME) program, residents may be reluctant to provide an honest evaluation of their PGME program, because they fear embarrassment or repercussions from their supervisors if their anonymity as a respondent is endangered. This study was set up to test the hypothesis that current residents in a PGME program provide more positive evaluations of their PGME program than residents having completed it. We therefore compared PGME learning environment evaluations of current residents in the program to leaving residents having completed it.
This observational study used data gathered routinely in the quality cycle of PGME programs at two Dutch teaching hospitals to test our hypothesis. At both hospitals, all current PGME residents are requested to complete the Scan of Postgraduate Education Environment Domains (SPEED) annually. Residents leaving the hospital after completion of the PGME program are also asked to complete the SPEED after an exit interview with the hospital's independent residency coordinator. All SPEED evaluations are collected and analysed anonymously. We compared the residents' grades (on a continuous scale ranging from 0 (poor) to 10 (excellent)) on the three SPEED domains (content, atmosphere, and organization of the program) and their mean (overall department grade) between current and leaving residents.
Mean (SD) overall SPEED department grades were 8.00 (0.52) for 287 current residents in 39 PGME programs and 8.07 (0.48) for 170 leaving residents in 39 programs. Neither the overall SPEED department grades (t test, p = 0.53, 95% CI for difference - 0.16 to 0.31) nor the department SPEED domain grades (MANOVA, F(3, 62) = 0.79, p = 0.51) were significantly different between current and leaving residents.
Residents leaving the program did not provide more critical evaluations of their PGME learning environment than current residents in the program. This suggests that current residents' evaluations of their postgraduate learning environment were not affected by social desirability bias or fear of repercussions from faculty.
即使在对研究生医学教育（PGME）计划进行匿名评估时，住院医师也可能不愿意对其 PGME 计划进行诚实评估，因为如果他们作为受访者的匿名性受到威胁，他们可能会感到尴尬或受到主管的影响。本研究旨在检验以下假设，即在 PGME 计划中的当前住院医师比已经完成该计划的住院医师对其 PGME 计划的评价更为积极。因此，我们将计划中的当前住院医师的 PGME 学习环境评估与已经完成该计划的住院医师进行了比较。
这项观察性研究使用了在荷兰两所教学医院的 PGME 计划质量周期中常规收集的数据来检验我们的假设。在这两所医院，所有当前的 PGME 住院医师都被要求每年完成研究生教育环境领域扫描（SPEED）。在完成 PGME 计划后离开医院的住院医师也被要求在与医院独立住院医师协调员进行离职面谈后完成 SPEED。所有 SPEED 评估均匿名收集和分析。我们比较了住院医师在 SPEED 的三个领域（内容、氛围和计划组织）的成绩（连续评分范围从 0（差）到 10（优））以及他们的平均分（整体科室成绩），比较了当前和离职住院医师的成绩。
39 个 PGME 计划中的 287 名当前住院医师的平均（SD）整体 SPEED 科室成绩为 8.00（0.52），39 个计划中的 170 名离职住院医师的平均成绩为 8.07（0.48）。当前和离职住院医师的整体 SPEED 科室成绩（t 检验，p=0.53，95%CI 差值为-0.16 至 0.31）和 SPEED 科室成绩（MANOVA，F（3，62）=0.79，p=0.51）均无显著差异。
离开计划的住院医师对其 PGME 学习环境的评价并没有比计划中的当前住院医师更为苛刻。这表明，当前住院医师对其研究生学习环境的评价并未受到社会期望偏差或担心受到教职员工影响的影响。
