Examining the accuracy of residents’ self-assessments and faculty assessment behaviours in anesthesiology

Background: Residents’ accurate self-assessment and clinical judgment are essential for optimizing their clinical skills development. Evidence from the medical literature suggests that residents generally do poorly at self-assessing their performance, often due to factors relating to learners’ pers...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Melinda Fleming, Danika Vautour, Michael McMullen, Nicholas Cofie, Nancy Dalgarno, Rachel Phelan, Glenio Mizubuti
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Canadian Medical Education Journal 2021
Materias:	Education (General) L7-991 Medicine (General) R5-920
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/2decfd32af294abca89c7507e2725edf
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:2decfd32af294abca89c7507e2725edf
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:2decfd32af294abca89c7507e2725edf2021-12-01T22:35:44ZExamining the accuracy of residents’ self-assessments and faculty assessment behaviours in anesthesiology10.36834/cmej.706971923-1202https://doaj.org/article/2decfd32af294abca89c7507e2725edf2021-09-01T00:00:00Zhttps://journalhosting.ucalgary.ca/index.php/cmej/article/view/70697https://doaj.org/toc/1923-1202 Background: Residents’ accurate self-assessment and clinical judgment are essential for optimizing their clinical skills development. Evidence from the medical literature suggests that residents generally do poorly at self-assessing their performance, often due to factors relating to learners’ personal backgrounds, cultures, the specific contexts of the learning environment and rater bias or inaccuracies. We evaluated the accuracy of anesthesiology residents’ self-assessed Global Entrustment scores and determined whether differences between faculty and resident scores varied by resident seniority, faculty leniency, and/or year of assessment. Methods: We employed variance components modeling techniques and analyzed 329 pairs of faculty and self-assessed entrustment scores among 43 faculty assessors and 15 residents. Using faculty scores as the gold standard, we compared faculty scores with residents’ scores (xi(faculty)–xi(resident)), and determined residents’ accuracy, including over- and under-confidence. Results: The results indicate that residents were respectively over- and under-confident in 10.9% and 54.4% of the assessments but more consistent in their individual self-assessments (rho = 0.70) than faculty assessors. Faculty scores were significantly higher (α = 0.396; z = 4.39; p < 0.001) than residents’ self-assessed scores. Being a lenient/dovish (β = 0.121, z = 3.16, p < 0.01) and a neutral (β = 0.137, z = 3.57, p < 0.001) faculty assessor predicted a higher likelihood of resident under-confidence. Senior residents were significantly less likely to be under-confident compared to junior residents (β = -0.182, z =-2.45, p < 0.05). The accuracy of self-assessments did not significantly vary during the two years of the study period. Conclusions: The majority of residents’ self-assessments were inaccurate. Our findings may help identify the sources of such inaccuracies. Melinda FlemingDanika VautourMichael McMullenNicholas CofieNancy DalgarnoRachel PhelanGlenio MizubutiCanadian Medical Education JournalarticleEducation (General)L7-991Medicine (General)R5-920ENCanadian Medical Education Journal, Vol 12, Iss 4 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Education (General) L7-991 Medicine (General) R5-920
spellingShingle	Education (General) L7-991 Medicine (General) R5-920 Melinda Fleming Danika Vautour Michael McMullen Nicholas Cofie Nancy Dalgarno Rachel Phelan Glenio Mizubuti Examining the accuracy of residents’ self-assessments and faculty assessment behaviours in anesthesiology
description	Background: Residents’ accurate self-assessment and clinical judgment are essential for optimizing their clinical skills development. Evidence from the medical literature suggests that residents generally do poorly at self-assessing their performance, often due to factors relating to learners’ personal backgrounds, cultures, the specific contexts of the learning environment and rater bias or inaccuracies. We evaluated the accuracy of anesthesiology residents’ self-assessed Global Entrustment scores and determined whether differences between faculty and resident scores varied by resident seniority, faculty leniency, and/or year of assessment. Methods: We employed variance components modeling techniques and analyzed 329 pairs of faculty and self-assessed entrustment scores among 43 faculty assessors and 15 residents. Using faculty scores as the gold standard, we compared faculty scores with residents’ scores (xi(faculty)–xi(resident)), and determined residents’ accuracy, including over- and under-confidence. Results: The results indicate that residents were respectively over- and under-confident in 10.9% and 54.4% of the assessments but more consistent in their individual self-assessments (rho = 0.70) than faculty assessors. Faculty scores were significantly higher (α = 0.396; z = 4.39; p < 0.001) than residents’ self-assessed scores. Being a lenient/dovish (β = 0.121, z = 3.16, p < 0.01) and a neutral (β = 0.137, z = 3.57, p < 0.001) faculty assessor predicted a higher likelihood of resident under-confidence. Senior residents were significantly less likely to be under-confident compared to junior residents (β = -0.182, z =-2.45, p < 0.05). The accuracy of self-assessments did not significantly vary during the two years of the study period. Conclusions: The majority of residents’ self-assessments were inaccurate. Our findings may help identify the sources of such inaccuracies.
format	article
author	Melinda Fleming Danika Vautour Michael McMullen Nicholas Cofie Nancy Dalgarno Rachel Phelan Glenio Mizubuti
author_facet	Melinda Fleming Danika Vautour Michael McMullen Nicholas Cofie Nancy Dalgarno Rachel Phelan Glenio Mizubuti
author_sort	Melinda Fleming
title	Examining the accuracy of residents’ self-assessments and faculty assessment behaviours in anesthesiology
title_short	Examining the accuracy of residents’ self-assessments and faculty assessment behaviours in anesthesiology
title_full	Examining the accuracy of residents’ self-assessments and faculty assessment behaviours in anesthesiology
title_fullStr	Examining the accuracy of residents’ self-assessments and faculty assessment behaviours in anesthesiology
title_full_unstemmed	Examining the accuracy of residents’ self-assessments and faculty assessment behaviours in anesthesiology
title_sort	examining the accuracy of residents’ self-assessments and faculty assessment behaviours in anesthesiology
publisher	Canadian Medical Education Journal
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/2decfd32af294abca89c7507e2725edf
work_keys_str_mv	AT melindafleming examiningtheaccuracyofresidentsselfassessmentsandfacultyassessmentbehavioursinanesthesiology AT danikavautour examiningtheaccuracyofresidentsselfassessmentsandfacultyassessmentbehavioursinanesthesiology AT michaelmcmullen examiningtheaccuracyofresidentsselfassessmentsandfacultyassessmentbehavioursinanesthesiology AT nicholascofie examiningtheaccuracyofresidentsselfassessmentsandfacultyassessmentbehavioursinanesthesiology AT nancydalgarno examiningtheaccuracyofresidentsselfassessmentsandfacultyassessmentbehavioursinanesthesiology AT rachelphelan examiningtheaccuracyofresidentsselfassessmentsandfacultyassessmentbehavioursinanesthesiology AT gleniomizubuti examiningtheaccuracyofresidentsselfassessmentsandfacultyassessmentbehavioursinanesthesiology
_version_	1718404091433975808

Examining the accuracy of residents’ self-assessments and faculty assessment behaviours in anesthesiology

Ejemplares similares