Abel Gary, Froud Rob, Pitchforth Emma, Treadgold Bethan, Hocking Lucy, Sussex Jon, Elliott Marc, Campbell John
University of Exeter Collaboration for Academic Primary Care (APEx), University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK.
Clinvivo, Edenbridge, Kent, UK.
JRSM Open. 2024 Jan 14;15(1):20542704231217887. doi: 10.1177/20542704231217887. eCollection 2024 Jan.
To establish principles informing a new scoring system for the UK's Clinical Impact Awards and pilot a system based on those principles.
A three-round online Delphi process was used to generate consensus from experts on principles a scoring system should follow. We conducted a shadow scoring exercise of 20 anonymised, historic applications using a new scoring system incorporating those principles.
Assessment of clinical excellence awards for senior doctors and dentists in England and Wales.
The Delphi panel comprised 45 members including clinical excellence award assessors and representatives of professional bodies. The shadow scoring exercise was completed by 24 current clinical excellence award assessors.
The Delphi panel rated the appropriateness of a series of items. In the shadow scoring exercise, a novel scoring system was used with each of five domains rated on a 0-10 scale.
Consensus was achieved around principles that could underpin a future scoring system; in particular, a 0-10 scale with the lowest point on the scale reflecting someone operating below the expectations of their job plan was agreed as appropriate. The shadow scoring exercise showed similar levels of reliability between the novel scoring system and that used historically, but with potentially better distinguishing performance at higher levels of performance.
Clinical excellence awards represent substantial public spending and thus far the deployment of these funds has lacked a strong evidence base. We have developed a new scoring system in a robust manner which shows improvements over current arrangements.
为英国临床影响力奖建立指导新评分系统的原则，并基于这些原则试行一个系统。
采用三轮在线德尔菲法，以就评分系统应遵循的原则达成专家共识。我们使用一个纳入这些原则的新评分系统，对20份匿名的历史申请进行了模拟评分。
对英格兰和威尔士的高级医生和牙医的临床卓越奖进行评估。
德尔菲小组由45名成员组成，包括临床卓越奖评估人员和专业团体代表。模拟评分由24名现任临床卓越奖评估人员完成。
德尔菲小组对一系列项目的适宜性进行评分。在模拟评分中，使用了一种新颖的评分系统，五个领域中的每个领域都按0至10分进行评分。
围绕可为未来评分系统提供支撑的原则达成了共识；特别是，商定采用0至10分的评分标准，其中最低分反映某人的工作表现低于其工作计划的预期，这是合适的。模拟评分显示，新评分系统与以往使用的评分系统之间的可靠性水平相似，但在较高表现水平上可能具有更好的区分性能。
临床卓越奖代表着大量的公共支出，到目前为止，这些资金的使用缺乏有力的证据基础。我们以稳健的方式开发了一种新的评分系统，该系统比目前的安排有所改进。
