Gielissen Katherine A, Foust Anna, Weinstein Amy R, Duca Nicholas, Jenkins Melissa O, Kisielewski Michael, Misra Savita, Dunne Dana
Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA.
University of South Alabama College of Medicine, Mobile, AL, USA.
J Gen Intern Med. 2025 Jan;40(1):46-53. doi: 10.1007/s11606-024-08991-5. Epub 2024 Aug 15.
In the present assessment environment in undergraduate medical education at U.S. medical schools, the prevalence and implementation of Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs) in internal medicine (IM) clerkships are not well understood.
To describe the prevalence and approach to EPA use in U.S. IM clerkships.
Cross-sectional, nationally representative survey of core IM clerkship directors.
One-hundred forty IM clerkship directors at Liaison Committee on Medical Education-accredited U.S./U.S. territory-based allopathic medical schools with membership in the Clerkship Directors in Internal Medicine (CDIM) as of December 2022.
Use of EPAs in IM core clerkships, including use for grading, types of EPAs, use of supportive measures for assessment, and current validity frameworks.
The survey response was 80% (112/140); two additional respondents completed the section on EPA use (n = 114). Approximately half of respondents (47%) reported their IM clerkship used EPAs. Among schools accredited after 1977, a higher percentage was associated with having incorporated EPAs (p = 0.03). The Association of American Medical Colleges Core EPAs for Entering Residency (CEPAER) was the most common framework used by Clerkship Directors (CDs) for developing EPAs (55%). Most CDs (56%) used EPAs for both formative and summative assessments, and approximately half of CDs (48%) used EPAs for a portion of the final grade determination. CDs who used EPAs were no more likely to report efforts to ensure the validity of assessment, the use of faculty development, or that written assessments were a valid measure of students' performance compared to those who did not use EPAs.
Although EPAs have experienced substantial uptake in the IM clerkship and contribute to formative and summative assessment of learners, their use does not appear to be associated with enhanced efforts to obtain validity information.
在美国医学院校本科医学教育的当前评估环境中,内科实习中可托付专业活动(EPA)的普及程度和实施情况尚未得到充分了解。
描述美国内科实习中EPA的使用情况和方法。
对内科核心实习主任进行的全国代表性横断面调查。
截至2022年12月,在医学教育联络委员会认证的美国/美国领土上的全科医学学校中,有140名内科实习主任,他们是内科实习主任协会(CDIM)的成员。
内科核心实习中EPA的使用情况,包括用于评分的情况、EPA的类型、评估支持措施的使用情况以及当前的效度框架。
调查回复率为80%(112/140);另外两名受访者完成了关于EPA使用情况的部分(n = 114)。约一半的受访者(47%)报告他们的内科实习使用了EPA。在1977年后获得认证的学校中,采用EPA的比例更高(p = 0.03)。美国医学院协会进入住院医师阶段的核心EPA(CEPAER)是实习主任(CD)制定EPA时最常用的框架(55%)。大多数CD(56%)将EPA用于形成性和总结性评估,约一半的CD(48%)将EPA用于部分最终成绩的确定。与未使用EPA的CD相比,使用EPA的CD在报告确保评估效度的努力、教师发展的使用情况或书面评估是学生表现的有效衡量标准方面的可能性并不更高。
尽管EPA在内科实习中得到了广泛采用,并有助于对学习者进行形成性和总结性评估,但它们的使用似乎与获取效度信息的更多努力无关。