Exploring Validity Evidence Associated With Questionnaire-Based Tools for Assessing the Professional Performance of Physicians: A Systematic Review.

Clicks: 401
ID: 58981
2019
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #10 of 146 articles by views in Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 146 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
To collect and examine-using an argument-based validity approach-validity evidence of questionnaire-based tools used to assess physicians' clinical, teaching, and research performance.In October 2016, the authors conducted a systematic search of the literature seeking articles about questionnaire-based tools for assessing physicians' professional performance published from inception to October 2016. They included studies reporting on the validity evidence of tools used to assess physicians' clinical, teaching, and research performance. Using Kane's validity framework, they conducted data extraction based on four inferences in the validity argument: scoring, generalization, extrapolation, and implications.They included 46 articles on 15 tools assessing clinical performance and 72 articles on 38 tools assessing teaching performance. They found no studies on research performance tools. Only 12 of the tools (23%) gathered evidence on all four components of Kane's validity argument. Validity evidence focused mostly on generalization and extrapolation inferences. Scoring evidence showed mixed results. Evidence on implications was generally missing.Based on the argument-based approach to validity, not all questionnaire-based tools seem to support their intended use. Evidence concerning implications of questionnaire-based tools is mostly lacking, thus weakening the argument to use these tools for formative and, especially, for summative assessments of physicians' clinical and teaching performance. More research on implications is needed to strengthen the argument and to provide support for decisions based on these tools, particularly for high-stakes, summative decisions. To meaningfully assess academic physicians in their tripartite role as doctor, teacher, and researcher, additional assessment tools are needed.
Reference Key
van-der-meulen2019exploringacademic Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors van der Meulen, Mirja W;Smirnova, Alina;Heeneman, Sylvia;Oude Egbrink, Mirjam G A;van der Vleuten, Cees P M;Lombarts, Kiki M J M H;
Journal Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges
Year 2019
DOI
10.1097/ACM.0000000000002767
URL
Keywords
Evaluation assessment reflection pharmacy education reflective practice

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.