Department of Psychiatry, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, 4301 Jones Bridge Rd, Bethesda, MD, 20814, USA.
The Henry M. Jackson Foundation for the Advancement of Military Medicine, Bethesda, MD, USA.
BMC Med Educ. 2022 May 6;22(1):347. doi: 10.1186/s12909-022-03402-x.
Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs) assessments measure learners' competence with an entrustment or supervisory scale. Designed for workplace-based assessment EPA assessments have also been proposed for undergraduate medical education (UME), where assessments frequently occur outside the workplace and may be less intuitive, raising validity concerns. This study explored how assessors make entrustment determinations in UME, with additional specific comparison based on familiarity with prior performance in the context of longitudinal student-assessor relationships.
A qualitative approach using think-alouds was employed. Assessors assessed two students (familiar and unfamiliar) completing a history and physical examination using a supervisory scale and then thought-aloud after each assessment. We conducted a thematic analysis of assessors' response processes and compared them based on their familiarity with a student.
Four themes and fifteen subthemes were identified. The most prevalent theme related to "student performance." The other three themes included "frame of reference," "assessor uncertainty," and "the patient." "Previous student performance" and "affective reactions" were subthemes more likely to inform scoring when faculty were familiar with a student, while unfamiliar faculty were more likely to reference "self" and "lack confidence in their ability to assess."
Student performance appears to be assessors' main consideration for all students, providing some validity evidence for the response process in EPA assessments. Several problematic themes could be addressed with faculty development while others appear to be inherent to entrustment and may be more challenging to mitigate. Differences based on assessor familiarity with student merits further research on how trust develops over time.
可委托专业活动 (EPAs) 的评估使用委托或监督量表来衡量学习者的能力。专为基于工作场所的评估而设计,EPAs 评估也被提议用于本科医学教育 (UME),其中评估经常在工作场所之外进行,可能不那么直观,从而引发有效性问题。本研究探讨了评估者如何在 UME 中进行委托决策,并且基于对纵向学生评估者关系背景下先前表现的熟悉程度进行了额外的具体比较。
使用出声思维的定性方法。评估者使用监督量表评估两名学生(熟悉和不熟悉)进行病史采集和体格检查,然后在每次评估后进行出声思维。我们对评估者的反应过程进行了主题分析,并根据他们对学生的熟悉程度进行了比较。
确定了四个主题和十五个子主题。最常见的主题与“学生表现”有关。其他三个主题包括“参考框架”、“评估者的不确定性”和“患者”。“以前的学生表现”和“情感反应”是评估者熟悉学生时更有可能影响评分的子主题,而不熟悉学生的评估者更可能参考“自我”和“对自己评估能力缺乏信心”。
学生表现似乎是评估者对所有学生的主要考虑因素,为 EPA 评估中的反应过程提供了一些有效性证据。一些有问题的主题可以通过教师发展来解决,而其他主题似乎是委托的固有特征,可能更难减轻。评估者对学生熟悉程度的差异需要进一步研究信任如何随着时间的推移而发展。