Cited 0 times in Scipus Cited Count

Assessment of medical students’ clinical performance using high-fidelity simulation: comparison of peer and instructor assessment

DC Field Value Language
dc.contributor.authorYu, JH-
dc.contributor.authorLee, MJ-
dc.contributor.authorKim, SS-
dc.contributor.authorYang, MJ-
dc.contributor.authorCho, HJ-
dc.contributor.authorNoh, CK-
dc.contributor.authorLee, GH-
dc.contributor.authorLee, SK-
dc.contributor.authorSong, MR-
dc.contributor.authorLee, JH-
dc.contributor.authorKim, M-
dc.contributor.authorJung, YJ-
dc.date.accessioned2023-01-26T06:10:20Z-
dc.date.available2023-01-26T06:10:20Z-
dc.date.issued2021-
dc.identifier.urihttp://repository.ajou.ac.kr/handle/201003/24070-
dc.description.abstractBackground: High-fidelity simulators are highly useful in assessing clinical competency; they enable reliable and valid evaluation. Recently, the importance of peer assessment has been highlighted in healthcare education, and studies using peer assessment in healthcare, such as medicine, nursing, dentistry, and pharmacy, have examined the value of peer assessment. This study aimed to analyze inter-rater reliability between peers and instructors and examine differences in scores between peers and instructors in the assessment of high-fidelity-simulation-based clinical performance by medical students. Methods: This study analyzed the results of two clinical performance assessments of 34 groups of fifth-year students at Ajou University School of Medicine in 2020. This study utilized a modified Queen’s Simulation Assessment Tool to measure four categories: primary assessment, diagnostic actions, therapeutic actions, and communication. In order to estimate inter-rater reliability, this study calculated the intraclass correlation coefficient and used the Bland and Altman method to analyze agreement between raters. A t-test was conducted to analyze the differences in evaluation scores between colleagues and faculty members. Group differences in assessment scores between peers and instructors were analyzed using the independent t-test. Results: Overall inter-rater reliability of clinical performance assessments was high. In addition, there were no significant differences in overall assessment scores between peers and instructors in the areas of primary assessment, diagnostic actions, therapeutic actions, and communication. Conclusions: The results indicated that peer assessment can be used as a reliable assessment method compared to instructor assessment when evaluating clinical competency using high-fidelity simulators. Efforts should be made to enable medical students to actively participate in the evaluation process as fellow assessors in high-fidelity-simulation-based assessment of clinical performance in situations similar to real clinical settings.-
dc.language.isoen-
dc.subject.MESHClinical Competence-
dc.subject.MESHEducational Measurement-
dc.subject.MESHHigh Fidelity Simulation Training-
dc.subject.MESHHumans-
dc.subject.MESHPeer Group-
dc.subject.MESHReproducibility of Results-
dc.subject.MESHStudents, Medical-
dc.titleAssessment of medical students’ clinical performance using high-fidelity simulation: comparison of peer and instructor assessment-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.identifier.pmid34563180-
dc.identifier.urlhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8467013/-
dc.subject.keywordclinical performance-
dc.subject.keywordhigh-fidelity simulation-
dc.subject.keywordmedical student-
dc.subject.keywordpeer assessment-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorYu, JH-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorLee, MJ-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorKim, SS-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorYang, MJ-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorCho, HJ-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorNoh, CK-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorLee, GH-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorSong, MR-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorLee, JH-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorKim, M-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorJung, YJ-
dc.type.localJournal Papers-
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/s12909-021-02952-w-
dc.citation.titleBMC medical education-
dc.citation.volume21-
dc.citation.number1-
dc.citation.date2021-
dc.citation.startPage506-
dc.citation.endPage506-
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitationBMC medical education, 21(1). : 506-506, 2021-
dc.identifier.eissn1472-6920-
dc.relation.journalidJ014726920-
Appears in Collections:
Journal Papers > School of Medicine / Graduate School of Medicine > Office of Medical Education
Journal Papers > School of Medicine / Graduate School of Medicine > Medical Humanities & Social Medicine
Journal Papers > School of Medicine / Graduate School of Medicine > Gastroenterology
Journal Papers > School of Medicine / Graduate School of Medicine > Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine
Journal Papers > School of Medicine / Graduate School of Medicine > Obstetrics & Gynecology
Journal Papers > School of Medicine / Graduate School of Medicine > Pulmonary & Critical Care Medicine
Files in This Item:
34563180.pdfDownload

qrcode

해당 아이템을 이메일로 공유하기 원하시면 인증을 거치시기 바랍니다.

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Browse