David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, 10833 Le Conte Ave, Los Angeles, CA, 90095, USA.
College of Medicine, Charles R. Drew University of Medicine and Science, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
BMC Med Educ. 2023 Oct 24;23(1):788. doi: 10.1186/s12909-023-04770-8.
Pass/fail (P/F) grading has emerged as an alternative to tiered clerkship grading. Systematically evaluating existing literature and surveying program directors (PD) perspectives on these consequential changes can guide educators in addressing inequalities in academia and students aiming to improve their residency applications. In our survey, a total of 1578 unique PD responses (63.1%) were obtained across 29 medical specialties. With the changes to United States Medical Licensure Examination (USMLE), responses showed increased importance of core clerkships with the implementation of Step 2CK cutoffs. PDs believed core clerkship performance was a reliable representation of an applicant's preparedness for residency, particularly in Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education's (ACGME)Medical Knowledge and Patient Care and Procedural Skills. PDs disagreed with P/F core clerkships because it more difficult to objectively compare applicants. No statistically significant differences in responses were found in PD preferential selection when comparing applicants from tiered and P/F core clerkship grading systems. If core clerkships adopted P/F scoring, PDs would further increase emphasis on narrative assessment, sub-internship evaluation, reference letters, academic awards, professional development and medical school prestige. In the meta-analysis, of 6 studies from 2,118 participants, adjusted scaled scores with mean difference from an equal variance model from PDs showed residents from tiered clerkship grading systems overall performance, learning ability, work habits, personal evaluations, residency selection and educational evaluation were not statistically significantly different than from residents from P/F systems. Overall, our dual study suggests that while PDs do not favor P/F core clerkships, PDs do not have a selection preference and do not report a difference in performance between applicants from P/F vs. tiered grading core clerkship systems, thus providing fertile grounds for institutions to examine the feasibility of adopting P/F grading for core clerkships.
通过/不通过(P/F)评分已经成为分层实习评分的替代方法。系统地评估现有文献并调查课程主任(PD)对这些变革的看法,可以指导教育工作者解决学术界的不平等问题,以及那些希望提高住院医师申请的学生。在我们的调查中,在 29 个医学专业中总共获得了 1578 个独特的 PD 回复(63.1%)。随着美国医师执照考试(USMLE)的变化,随着 Step 2CK 截止分数的实施,PD 认为核心实习的重要性增加了。PD 认为核心实习成绩是申请人准备住院医师的可靠表现,特别是在研究生医学教育认证委员会(ACGME)的医学知识和患者护理以及程序技能方面。PD 不同意核心实习的 P/F 评分,因为更难客观比较申请人。在比较分层和 P/F 核心实习评分系统的申请人时,PD 的偏好选择中没有发现统计学上的显著差异。如果核心实习采用 P/F 评分,PD 将进一步强调叙述评估、实习评价、推荐信、学术奖项、专业发展和医学院声望。在荟萃分析中,从 2118 名参与者的 6 项研究中,PD 采用平均差异从等方差模型得出的调整标度得分显示,来自分层实习评分系统的住院医师总体表现、学习能力、工作习惯、个人评价、住院医师选择和教育评价与来自 P/F 系统的住院医师没有统计学上的显著差异。总体而言,我们的双研究表明,尽管 PD 不赞成核心实习的 P/F 评分,但 PD 没有选择偏好,并且报告 P/F 与分层实习评分核心实习系统的申请人之间的表现没有差异,因此为机构提供了有利条件,可以研究采用 P/F 评分对核心实习的可行性。